2025:UHC:8289 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2703/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Ms. Prabha Naithani, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Bankoti, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Tushar Upadhyay, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4/University. 2. Petitioner appeared in B.Com fourth semester examination, held in the month of May/June, 2025; however, he was declared unsuccessful in one subject, namely, Income Tax Law & Accounts. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to produce the original answer sheet of petitioner of Income Tax Law and Account subject of B.Com 4th semester bearing roll number 4233470030351 and to conduct fresh scrutiny/rechecking of answer sheet of petitioner and award marks according to his performance. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus restraining the respondents from declaring elections of Student Union of colleges affiliated to Respondent University till the decision on representation of petitioner for revaluation/rechecking of Income Tax Law and Account subject of B.com 4th semester. 3. Learned counsel for the University has produced in Court photocopy of the answer script of the petitioner for Income Tax Law & Accounts paper. By referring to various pages of the answer script, learned counsel for the University submits that with the help of some employee of the University, petitioner has managed to increase his marks in the answer script by interpolation and now he wants 2025:UHC:8289 scrutiny of marks. 4. He refers to page nos. 21, 25 & 29 of photocopy of the answer script, which is produced in Court, for contending that 00 marks awarded by examiner was altered to 09, at other place, 00 marks was increased to 08 and thereafter 03 marks was changed to 08 by interpolation. 5. He submits that Registrar of the University has formed a committee, consisting of three members, which will look into the matter and take decision as per law. 6. Since petitioner has sought a direction to conduct scrutiny of the marks and as per stand taken by University, marks have been tampered with, therefore, the prayer as made by petitioner, cannot be granted at this stage. 7. Let the enquiry committee, constituted by Registrar of the University complete the enquiry to ascertain who was involved in the mischief and what role petitioner had in the incident of changing the marks, awarded by the examiner. Petitioner, if found innocent, can then make such prayer before University authorities. 8. Thus, this Court is not inclined to issue any direction, as prayed for, at the moment. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 17.09.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA4 3D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.09.17 17:40:05 +05'30'