Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4424 (CAL)

MD KAMRUZZAMAN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/107/2026 · 2026-02-11

Amrita Sinha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

11-02-2026 Item No.5 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No.107 of 2026 Md Kamruzzaman -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Ali Ahsan Alamgir Ms. Rabia Khatoon Ms. Soma Mal Ms. June Modok …for the petitioner Mr. Manoj Kumar Mondal Ms. Kakali Pal …for the State Mr. Biswarop Bhattacharya Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh …for the Commission Mr. Kunal Ganguly …for the Board 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client does not want to press prayers (d) and (g) of the writ petition. 2. The petitioner in this instant writ petition alleges that his marks have not been properly allotted despite rightly answering the questions. 3. Learned counsel for the West Bengal Central School Service Commission has produced the photocopy of the original OMR answer sheet to show that some answers were incorrectly shaded. He submits that the computer has failed to read such answers correctly. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the OMR sheets should be evaluated manually. 5. The Court has perused the OMR answer sheets. It appears that in respect of one question, the petitioner put a dot in the OMR sheets, apart from shading one of the other circles. The computer failed to detect the correct answer. 6. The correct method of shading is clearly mentioned at the top of the OMR sheets. Only one circle, out of the four circles, is required to be shaded. The other circles cannot have even a dot over there. The moment there is any mark in any of the other circles, the computer fails to read such answer as correct. 7. The prayer of the petitioner for checking up the answer sheet manually cannot be accepted. The answer sheets are prepared to be checked by the computer. The answer scripts of all other candidates have been assessed by the computer. There is no reason as to why there shall be a departure in the mode of checking of the answer sheet of the petitioner. 8. The Court does not find any error on the part of the Commission. 9. The writ petition, thus, fails and is hereby dismissed. 10. The affidavit of service and the photocopy of the OMR sheet produced before this Court be taken on record. 11. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 12. Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties. [Amrita Sinha, J] 2 3