Title not extracted — [1985] 1 S.C.R. 430
This document's party names could not be extracted from the scanned record. Report an error.
Tools
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- (year only)
- Bench
- B. Eradi
- Citation
- [1985] 1 S.C.R. 430
Source PDF (original scan)
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0
Machine-read from a scanned report. Check the printed page before citing. Report an error.
Headnote — Supreme Court Reports (editorial summary, not part of the judgment)
Held
The decision followed by the Bombay High Court has been overruled by this Court in Mal:arashtra State Board of Secondary and Hfgher Secondary Educatio1 and another v. Paritosh Bhupesh Ku1narjheth and others . The present case is fully covered by the dicta laid down in the said ruling. Hence the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the validity of clauses (l) and (2) of Rule 37 is upheld. [431F-G]
Reporter's headnote (continued) and case details
A GOA, DAMAN AND DIU BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATTON y.
KUMAR! HEMA LAAD AND ORS.
B August 16, 1984
[D.A. DESAI ;\ND V. BALAKR!SHNA ERADI, JJ.]
Goa, Da1nan and Jiu Secondary and Hig.'ier Secondary Education Rules, C 1975-Framed under Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act -Clau·es (I) and (2) of rule 3 7 insofar as they prohibit inspection a'ld/or revaluation of answer books-Validity of-Held valid.
On being challenged, the Bombay High Court, following its earlier decision in Paritosh Bhupeih Ku111arsheth and others v. Maharashtra State D Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Pune and another, AIR 1981 Bombay 895, declared clauses (1) and (2) of Ruic 37 of Goa, Daman ... and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Rules, 1975 insofar as they prohibit inspection and/or revaluation of answer books. as invalid. Hence these appeals by special leave.
E Allowing the appeals.
Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and another v. Paritosh Bhupejh 1 K111narsheth and others, d1:cided by Supreme Court [1985] l S.C.R. 29. G ' Appeal Nos. 4152 Civil CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION to 4157 of 1982. Appeals by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated fl the 2nd November, 1982 of the I)ombay Hi$h Court, Panaji Bench,
EDUCATION BOARD, GOA v. K. 11. LAAD 43 l
(Goa), in Special Civil Application Writ Petitions Nos 129, 110, A 103, 101, 102 and lOl of 1980. "· So/i J. Sorabjee, Mrs. A. K. Verma and 0. C. Mathur for the Appellant.
Judgment
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B
BALA!::RJSHNA BRAD!, J. These appeals by special leave are directed against the Judgment of the High Court of Bombay (Panaji Bench) dated 2.l l.1982 whereby a Division Bench of the High
• Court allowed a batch of Writ Petitions filed by some students who had appeared in the XII standard examination conducted by the Goa, Daman and Diu Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary c ,, Education and declared the provisions of clauses(!) and (2) of Rule 37 of the rules framed by the Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu under Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Edu- cation Board Act as ultra vires and invalid insofar as thoy prohibit inspection and/or revaluation of answer books. In reaching the said conclusion on the. validity of the impugned rules the High Court followed its earlier Judgment in Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth and others v. Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secon- dary Eduaation, Pune and another-AIR 198! Bombay 895-wherein Regulation 104 (3) framed by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education which is an identical provision prohibiting inspection and/or revaluation of answer books was declared illegal.and ultra vires. The correctness of the said Judg- ., ment (AIR 1981 Bombay 895) came in for examination by this Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and another v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth and others.(1) By Judgment dated 17th July 1984, this Court reversed the view taken by the Bombay High Court and upheld the validity of the impugned clauses (1) and (3) of Regulation 104. The present case is fully covered by the dicta laid down in the said ruling. Hence we set aside the Judgment of the High Court and uphold the validity of clauses (l) and (2) of Rule 37 of the rules framed under the Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act. These appeals are allowed and the writ petitions filed in the High Court will stand dismissed. The appellant "ill get its costs from the respondents.
H.S.K. Appeal allowed. (I) [t985] I S.C.R. 29.
Report an error in this judgment →
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0