Petitioner sought mandamus to produce UPTET 2018 answer sheets for re-evaluation. Court found petitioner satisfied after receiving expert guidelines, held no error apparent, and dismissed the petition.
Petition to produce answer sheets and request for re-evaluation was dismissed with instructions copy furnished.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1025 of 2019 Petitioner :- Km. Shaileja Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Narayan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Raj Narayan, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Girish Vishwakarma, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Sri Raj Narayan submits that this petition has been filed by the petitioner-Km. Shaileja seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent concerned to produce answer sheet of question nos. 6, 66 and 96 of UPTET 2018 (Junior Level) for evaluation of the marks and another relief has been sought to decide the representation.
According to the petitioner, they had put tick mark before the correct option for question nos. 6, 66 and 96, but respondents have shown all the question to be answered incorrectly and therefore, on the basis of such averments, petition was filed.
Sri Girish Vishwakarma has produced copy of the OMR answer sheet for petitioner's roll no. 1710301141 and registration no. 1700035218 having Bar Code No. 3407733, in which, petitioner had filled option no. 2 for question no. 6, option no. 2 for question no. 66 and option no. 4 for question no. 96, whereas according to the Expert Committee Report, correct option for question no. 6 is option no. 4. Similarly, for question no. 66, it is option no. 4 and for question no. 96, it is option no. 3, therefore, on this touchstone, all the questions namely, 6, 66 and 96 were wrongly answered by the petitioner.
Petitioner after going through the OMR sheets and short instructions, furnished by Secretary of Examination, Regulatory, U.P., Prayagraj, which are taken on record, is satisfied that there is no error apparent in evaluation of the marks of the petitioner. Thus there is no ground to challenge the evaluation any further, therefore, petition fails and is dismissed.
A copy of the instructions have been furnished to the petitioner, for his reference and records.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Vikram/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to re-evaluation of marks in questions only answered incorrectly by the Expert Committee.
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued to produce answer sheets for verification of exam results.
Km. Shaileja
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Vivek Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
