that as per the record available in the Office of Controller of Examinations, the respondent No.4 for the first time appeared in the B.Sc. Part-I TDC Examinations (all papers) in the year 2004 and was declared unsuccessful and that he again appeared in the same examination in the year 2005 and was again declared unsuccessful. It was also stated therein that in the year 2006, the respondent No.4 re-appeared in all the papers of the said examination and cleared the same successfully and was promoted to Part-II of B.Sc. It was further stated therein that the private respondent appeared in the B.Sc. Part-II Examinations (all papers) in 2007 as a Regular Student and was declared ‘Pass’ in the B.Sc. Part-II TDC (Three Year Degree Course) Examinations, 2007. From the aforesaid certificate, it is seen that the petitioner, after he failed in the Examination of 2004 and 2005, re-appeared in all the papers in the year 2006 and successfully cleared the examination and was promoted to ‘Pass’. As far as the remaining years are concerned, there is no dispute that they did not pass compartmental. As the private respondent re-appeared in all the papers and was successful in the year 2006, it cannot be said that he passed the degree in compartmental. In this view of the matter, the Selection Board in awarding 9 marks to the respondent No.4 did not commit any illegality and in recommending him for the post of Graduate Teacher, B.Sc. (Pure Science) as he scored more marks than the petitioner in total in the interview. Resultantly, the interference of this Court is not called for in the selection and appointment of respondent No.4.
