Srushti Sudhakar Patil v. National Testing Agency Ministry Of Education And ORS

by VIDYA SURESH AMIN Date:

2022.10.21 11:04:50 +0530 VIDYA SURESH AMIN 913.WP12171_2022.doc Vidya Amin

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12171 OF 2022 Srushti Sudhakar Patil .. Petitioner Vs.

National Testing Agency, Ministry of Education & Ors.

.. Respondents Ms. Vrushali Mahindale a/w. Sumit Sonare, Dnyanesh Patil i/b. Mr. Aditya S. Raktade for the petitioner.

Mr. Rui Rodriques a/w. Ms. Nieyaati Masurkar for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

CORAM :

S.V. GANGAPURWALA & R.N.LADDHA, JJ.

DATE :

OCTOBER 20, 2022.

P.C.:

1.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the roll number on the OMR sheet is tampered with. The roll number on the test booklet is correctly written whereas in the OMR sheet there is interpolation. 3.

Mr. Rodriques, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2, on instructions, submits that the roll number, which according to the petitioner is tampered with, was not allotted to any candidate. 4.

The test booklet application contains the roll number in figures as well as in words and also the signature of the candidate. The coloured photocopy of the OMR is placed on record. The answersheet no. 7195672 is same as the number on the test booklet which is signed by

913.WP12171_2022.doc the petitioner. The signature on the OMR sheet and the test booklet also appears to be the same. The roll number, which according to the petitioner is overwritten and tampered in the OMR sheet, is not allotted to any candidate.

5.

In light of the above, we cannot accept the contention of the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contends that the original OMR may be called for, however, in the facts of the present case, as observed above, we do not find it necessary. 7.

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

(R.N. LADDHA, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)