Calcutta High Court
WPA/14399/2026 of ANKANA SINHA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 22 September 2026
2026 Item no.D/L 37 Court No. 24 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No. WPA 14399 of 2026 In the matter of : Miss Ankana Sinha …. Petitioner VS. The State of West Bengal & Ors. ….Respondents For the
22nd Sept., 2026
Item no.D/L 37
Court No. 24
Pradip, A.R.(Ct.)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Case No.
WPA 14399 of 2026
In the matter of:
Miss Ankana Sinha
…. Petitioner
VS.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
….Respondents
For the Petitioner:
Mr. Ritam Chowdhury
Mr. Dilip Kumar Sadhu
….Advocates
For the State:
Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee
Ms. Debleena Chatterjee
….Advocates
For the WBBSE:
Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya
Mr. Bibek Dutta
Mr. Manas Bhattacharyya
….Advocates
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. The petitioner appeared in the Madhyamik Examination-2025. Being dissatisfied with the marks awarded to her, she applied for post publication scrutiny. She has also obtained the photocopy of her answer scripts under the Right to Information Act. There has not been any change in her marks after the scrutiny.
3. The petitioner is still dissatisfied with the marks. She prays for reevaluation of her answer scripts by an independent expert.
4. The aforesaid submission and prayer of the petitioner has been opposed by the learned advocate representing the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education.
5. It has been submitted that there is no provision for reevaluation of answer script of a successful candidate.
Page 2
6. In the instant case, the petitioner successfully passed the examination. No provision of law has been produced by the learned advocate representing the petitioner in aid of her prayer.
7. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant writ petition. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
8. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
9. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)