Disposed

Vandana Kumari v. Jharkhand Academic Council Through Its Secretary And Anr.

Jharkhand HC15 Jul 2014WPC/2974/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged her result in the Jharkhand Academic Council's Teacher Eligibility Test, claiming four questions had two correct answers. The Court dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to file a representation before the Chairman for a fresh decision within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council, for a decision within two weeks.

Vandana Kumari Vs Jharkhand Academic Council… — Education and Admissions | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi

¶2

W.P.(C) No.2974 of 2014

¶3

Vandana Kumari ….........................................Petitioner

¶4

V E R S U S

¶5

Jharkhand Academic Council

¶6

The Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council

¶7

The Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council. . .. Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr.Mahesh Tiwary, Advocate For the JAC : Md. Sohail Anwar, Sr. Advocate

¶10

03/ 15.07.14.

¶11

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned

¶12

Sr. counsel appearing for the Jharkhand Academic Council.

¶13

According to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner had appeared in the Teacher Eligibility Test, 2012 held by Jharkhand Academic Council (in short 'JAC') on 26.4.2013. Though the petitioner is said to have secured 89 marks but he would have fetched more mark if the answers given by the petitioner for question no. 73, 84, 96 and 107 which carry two correct answer, would have been taken to be true. In that event, he would have fetched four more marks and under that situation, the petitioner has come to this Court for getting answer sheet re-evaluated particularly with respect to those four questions.

¶14

In this regard it was further submitted that if the petitioner would have given four more marks, he would have come out successful as cut off mark has been determined as 90.

¶15

As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Jharkhand Academic Council submits that after the examination was conducted, answer to all the questions were displayed in the web site of the Jharkhand Academic Council asking for objection from all concerned. After objections were received, the matter was referred to the Expert Committee, who determined the correct answer for each question and then answer sheets were evaluated. Upon evaluation, the petitioner did get 89 marks and therefore, it is not correct on the part of the petitioner to say that the questions which were at serial numbers 73, 84, 96 and 107 were having two correct answers.

¶16

Upon it, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

¶17

the matter be referred to the Jharkhand Academic Council as it is quite apparent that those questions do have two correct answers and the authority be directed to consider the same and to pass order.

¶18

Regard being had to the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council, respondent no.3 raising his grievance which has been raised hereinabove so that matter be decided within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of the representation by the Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council himself or

¶19

by any other competent person authorized by him.

¶20

Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

¶21

ND/

Vandana Kumari v. Jharkhand Academic Council Through Its Secretary And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vandana Kumari v. Jharkhand Academic Council Through Its Secretary And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Prasad Vs Dr Rohit Kumar Sharma

Sri Jaswant Singh Vs Bhagwan Mishra

Binod Jha Alias Binod Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Shilpa Murmu Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Nawani Kant Singh Vs Jharkhand Public Service Commission And Ors.

Anjlo Mahesh Baxla Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.