Disposed
Tapas Das and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Calcutta HCMAT/1242/2022
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
In an appeal regarding mark allocation, the court held that appellant no.2 was entitled to one additional mark for question no.6 based on a prior judgment and the Commission's concession, resulting in a corrected total of 81 marks; appellant no.1's prayer was rejected.
What did the court decide?
Appellant no.2 awarded one additional mark, correct total 81; consequential benefits extended. Appeal disposed of.