http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: GOA, DAMAN AND DIU BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: KUMARI HEMA LAAD AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT16/08/1984

BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) DESAI, D.A.

CITATION:  1984 AIR 1584            1985 SCR  (1) 430  1984 SCC  (4)  58        1984 SCALE  (2)171

ACT:      Goa, Daman  and  Diu  Secondary  and  Higher  Secondary Education  Rules,  1975-Framed  under  Goa,  Daman  and  Diu Secondary and  Higher Secondary  Education Board Act-Clauses (1) and  (2) of  rule 37 insofar as they prohibit inspection and or revaluation of answer books-Validity of-Held valid.

HEADNOTE:      On being  challenged, the  Bombay High Court, following its earlier  decision in  Paritosh  Bhupesh  Kumarsheth  and other v.  Maharashtra State  Board of  Secondary and  Higher Secondary Education,  Pune and another, AIR 1981 Bombay 895, declared clauses  (1) and  (2) of  Rule 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,      Allowing the appeals. ^      HELD: The  decision followed  by the  Bombay High Court has been  overruled by this Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary  and Higher  Secondary Education and another v. Paritosh Bhupesh  Kumarsheth and  others [1985] 1 S.C.R. 29. 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(1) and (2) of Rule 37 is upheld. [431F-G]      Maharashtra  State   Board  of   Secondary  and  Higher Secondary  Education   and  another   v.  Paritosh  Bhupesh, Kumarsheth and  others, decided  by Supreme  Court [1985]  1 S.C.R. 29.

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4152 to 4157 of 1982.      Appeals by  Special leave  from the  Judgment and Order dated the  2nd November,  1982 of  the  Bombay  High  Court, Panaji Bench, 431 (Goa), in Special Civil Application Writ Petitions Nos. 129,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

110, 103, 101, 102 and 10 of 1980.      Soli J. Sorabjee, Mrs. A. K. Verma and O. C. Mathur for the Appellant.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      BALAKRISHNA ERADI,  J. These  appeals by  special leave are directed  against the  Judgment of  the  High  Court  of Bombay (Panaji  Bench) dated  2.11.1982 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  Education and  declared the provisions of  clauses (1)  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 Education Board Act as  ultra vires  and invalid  insofar as  they  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 Secondary Education, Pune and another- AIR 1981 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 Judgment (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. 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  upheld  the  validity  of clauses (1) 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 will get its costs from the respondents. H.S.K.    Appeal allowed. 432