Allowed

Km. Kumkum v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2019WRIC/33395/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding directorship of a degree student to inspect her answer books for failed subjects. Court allowed the prayer to inspect answer sheets subject to examiner confidentiality, distinguishing cases furnishing marks versus inspecting answer books.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued directing respondent No. 2 to allow petitioner to inspect the copy of the subjects Physics and Chemistry.

Km. Kumkum Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 33395 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Km. Kumkum Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santoosh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rohit Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

The petitioner has appeared in the B.Sc IIIrd year examination for the session 2017-18 from Yameen Mohammad Saifi Degree College Dhanora (J.P. Nagar) affiliated with Mahatma Jyotiba Phule University, Bareilly.

¶7

The petitioner has failed in all the papers in Physics and Chemistry subjects. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to show the copy of the subjects Physics and Chemistry paper Ist, IInd and IIIrd of B.Sc IIIrd year course.

¶8

According to the petitioner, if she had been awarded correct marks in the questions attempted by her, she would have secured the minimum passing marks.

¶9

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has already applied under Right to Information Act to see the copies of the aforesaid subjects, as it is evident from (annexure3) to the writ petition.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the University will show the copy, if it is not weeded out.

¶11

The petitioner has only prayed for a direction to the respondent no. 2 to show her the copy of the aforesaid subjects.

¶12

The petitioner in support of the above submission has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court dated 16th July, 2018 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6723 of 2018 Mradul Mishra Vs. Chairman U.P. Public Service Commission Allahabad and Another. The aforesaid decision opines that permitting a candidate to inspect answer sheet does not involve any public interest and nor does it even affect the efficient operation of the Government. The other issue such as that confidentiality of sensitive information have been dealt with in the case of Central Board of Secondary Education and Another Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Others (2011) 8 SCC 497 and,

¶13

therefore, the candidates are entitled to inspect the answer sheet subject to maintaining confidentiality of the examiner.

¶14

In the case of Union Public Service Commission and Others Vs. Angesh Kumar and Others (2018) 4 SCC 530, the Apex Court laid down that the marks of Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically but only where the Court finds that public interest requires furnishing of information, the Court can certainly direct for giving the information so required.

¶15

The above decision is only with regard to furnishing of information and not with regard to showing or supplying the answer books to the candidate.

¶16

In the case of Mradul Mishra (supra), the Apex Court has ruled that the candidates are entitled to inspect the answer sheets.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as the petitioner is asking for inspecting the copy of the aforesaid subjects, I am of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to the same subject to maintaining of the confidentiality of the examiner. Accordingly a writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent no. 2 to allow the petitioner to inspect the copy of the aforesaid subjects on a given date which may be convenient to both the parties, if the copies are not weeded out.

¶18

The writ petition stands disposed off.

¶19

Order Date :- 1.11.2019 Ishan

Km. Kumkum v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Km. Kumkum v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aman Kumar Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Pinki Verma and Another Vs State of U P and 5 Others

C/M Nath Junior High School and Another Vs State of U.P. and Others

Parasuram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajan Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monisha Sonkar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others