A.M. Dinesh vs Director of Government Examinations and Selection Committee, Professional, Directorate of Medical Education

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for

the respondents.

By consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

The father of the petitioner has filed the affidavit in support of the writ petition. The petitioner, A.M. Dinesh, had written the Higher Secondary

Examinations, held in the month of March, 2009, and he had obtained 1140 marks out of 1200 marks. The petitioner had applied for re-valuation

in respect of Biology and English papers. In the re-valuation, five additional marks had been awarded in the English paper and two marks in the

Biology paper. After re-valuation the total marks obtained by the petitioner is 1147. After re-valuation the petitioner has been awarded 195 marks

out of 200 marks. The total marks allotted to Question No. 37 in Zoology paper, is ten marks. However,the petitioner had been awarded only five

marks for his answer to Question No. 37, even though he is entitled for the full marks. If full marks had been awarded to the petitioner he would

have secured sufficient cut off marks for getting admission for the M.B.B.S. Course, under the Backward Class community. In such circumstances,

the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for re-valuation of the answer to

Question 37 Part II-Zoology of the Biology paper of the Higher Secondary Examinations, conducted in the month of March, 2009.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court the following particulars, based on the instructions

received by her from the respondents.

Question No. 37: Preparation & Management of fish pond

I Preparation of pond

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allotted Awarded Remarks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i) Conditioning- 2 marks 1 mark

Lime � Layer at the bottom

It removes acidity.

It facilitates desirable geochemical cycles Not written So, 1 mark was not awarded

& kills unwanted soil organisms

Plankton growth should be checked before

stocking the fish

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii) Manuring � 3 Marks Organic waste, 1 Mark Pig dung & Poultry manure not written

plant manure,

Cow dung, pig dung, poultry manure to 1 Mark

enhance plankton growth--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NPK ratio 18:10:4 Only urea was written NPK Ratio is not correct

For a production of medium fertile soil

urea rate 200 kg/ha/year. Other points medium fertile soil &

ammonium sulphate was not written

Ammonium sulphate 450 kg/ha/year

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II Management of fish farm:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allotted Awarded Remarks

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i) Water quality regulating factors

(any two 2 x � = 1 mark)

1 mark

(Temp-25-33 C,

dissolved O2, PH 6.5-9.0,

hardness alkalinity, turbidity &

Plankton culture, etc)

ii) Feeding � explanation 2 marks Percentage of food types not written

artificial food contains 30 � 40%

protein, 5-10 % fat, 50-60% 1 mark

carbohydrates 5%, cellulose, 10%

water vitamins and minerals

Fish meal, prawn meal, wheat, silk Meals-type was not written

worm pupa, rice bran, weeds, oil cakes

For carnivorous fish � feeding should

be 2% of its body weight

III) Routine Management and 1 mark Routine management and disease

Disease explanation � 2 marks explanation was not written

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As per the re-valuation done in respect of paper II-Zoology of the Biology paper of the petitioner, he is eligible for only five marks for the answer

to Question No. 37.

In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of

the records available, it is clear that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason for this Court to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the

petitioner, in the present writ petition. In view of the particulars furnished by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, this Court

is constrained to hold that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.