Dismissed
Meenakshi Sharma v. Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr.
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/4749/2018
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
$~19
MEENAKSHI SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manish Kumar with Mr.Piyush Kaushik & Mr.Y. Sarad Chandra, Advs.
versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Seema Dolo, Mr.Amit Bansal & Mr.Akhil Kulshrestha, Advs. for R-1.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
O R D E R % 04.05.2018
Vide the present petition, the petitioner has sought a direction to the respondent No.1 to declare the result of her application dated 26.04.2018 challenging the answers of four questions of the JEE Main Examination held on 08.04.2018. The petitioner has also sought a direction to the respondents to admit her in the academic year 20182019 in case she is found to be successful in both the JEE Main Examination conducted by respondent No.1 and JEE Advanced Examination to be conducted by respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made an application dated 26.04.2018 challenging the answers of four questions of the JEE Examination held on 08.04.2018, as reflected in
its answer key released by the respondent No.1 on 24.04.2018. He submits that till date, the respondents have not decided the petitioner’s application and therefore, prays that the petitioner should be permitted to appear in the JEE Advanced Exam, that is scheduled on 20.05.2018.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1, who appears on advance notice, submits that the petitioner’s application dated 26.04.2018 has been duly considered and the respondents have after considering all objections to the original answer key, already placed the fresh answer key after carrying out revision, as applicable, on its website on 30.04.2018.
In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.1, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to challenge the fresh answer key placed by respondent No.1 on its website on 30.04.2018.
The petition along with pending applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
Needless to say that the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the said revised answer key on all grounds including the grounds taken in the present petition.
REKHA PALLI, J
MAY 04, 2018 gm
Meenakshi Sharma
Central Board of Secondary Education
Rekha Palli
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court