JUDGMENT This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 Constitution of India. Petitioner was regular student of Bajrang Higher Secondary School, Damkan, Tahsil-Jora, District-Morena, He appeared in the High School examination in the year, 1996. Bajrang Higher Secondary School was the centre. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the result was initially declared and on the same day thereafter cancelled on the ground of mass-copying. Respondents have filed return. Learned counsel for respondents contended that as a result of mass-copying the reports were submitted. Annexure R-1 is complaint, R-2 is the report of valuares, R-3 is the decision taken on the report, Shri R.D. Jain, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had appeared from Bajrang High School, Dhamkan, which was a centre. It is stated that apart from his case the complaints and reports were also made against the other centres. It is contended that the Board has cancelled the examination of petitioner's School's centre and discriminated. So far as the petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is concerned, the matter is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 470/97 Madhyamic Shiksha Mandai M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti & others. Copy of the said judgment has been placed on record. The Supreme Court has considered all aspects of the matter including the scope under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The Board has taken the decision and there are no malafide, alleged by the petitioner. The Supreme Court in the said case has also held that : "It is extremely difficult for the Board to identify the innocent students from those indulging in malpractices. One may feel sorry for the innocent students but one has to appreciate the situation in which the Board was placed and the alternatives that were available to it so far as this examination was concerned. It had no alternative but to cancel the results and we think, in the circumstances, they were justified in doing so. This should serve as lesson to the students that such malpractices will not help them succeed in the examination and they may have to go through the drill once again. We also think that those incharge of the examinations should also take action against their Supervisors/Invigilators etc., who either permit such activity or become silent spectators thereto. This should serve as lesson to the students that such malpractices will not help them succeed in the examination and they may have to go through the drill once again. We also think that those incharge of the examinations should also take action against their Supervisors/Invigilators etc., who either permit such activity or become silent spectators thereto. If they feel insecure because of the strong-arm tactics of those who indulge in malpractices, the remedy is to secure the services of the Uniformed Personnel, if need be, and ensure that students do not indulge in such malpractices." In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, no case is made out to exercise extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The petition fails and is dismissed.