ORDER 28.8.2003 — Heard Sri S. N. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri. S. K. Nayak-1, learned counsel for the opposite party-Board of Secondary Education, Orissa. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers. “(i) Why the opp. parties will not be directed to issue form in favour of the petitioner and to accept the filled up forms from her and to allow her to appear the Teachers Certificate Examina¬tion, 2003 in old syllabus either compartmentally or in all subjects. And; If the opp. parties do not show cause or show insufficient cause then the rule be made absolute by issuing an appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, and any other order/orders as deem fit and proper may be passed.” A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party No.1-Board wherefrom it is revealed that the petitioner took the C.T. Examination, 2000 as a regular candidate but could not become successful. Subsequently, she took the examination in the year 2001, where she having become unsuccessful again took the examination in the year 2002. It is the case of the petitioner that since she secured 288 marks as aggregate, under Regulation 15(F) of the Chapter-X of the Board’s Regulation, she was entitled to take the compartmen¬tal examination for three consecutive chances. But the Board Authorities are not permitting her to take such examination. The opposite party-Board in Para-8 of their counter have taken a stand that while introducing new courses for the academic session 1999-2000, it was decided that students who were prosecuting studies in C.T. Examination would appear in the year 2001 for the first time in the new course. But, the candidates/students who failed in the C.T. Examination appearing from unrecognised training institution will avail the C.T. Examination only up to 2002 and to beyond that. The decisions of the Board on the basis of the recommendation of the Education Committee are annexed as Annexure-A/1 and Annexure-B/1 to the counter affidavit. It is fairly admitted in Para-9 that under Regulation 15(F) of Chapter-X-D, a candidate qualifying for compartmental examination can take such examination in two consecutive chances following the one in which he/she had failed. But since the course in which the petitioner took the examination is more available, after 2002, such facility could not be allowed. It is fairly admitted in Para-9 that under Regulation 15(F) of Chapter-X-D, a candidate qualifying for compartmental examination can take such examination in two consecutive chances following the one in which he/she had failed. But since the course in which the petitioner took the examination is more available, after 2002, such facility could not be allowed. Sri S. N. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the clear provision of the Regulation, the peti¬tioner had acquired the eligibility for appearing in the compart¬mental examination upto two consecutive chances following one,for which she has failed. The submission cannot be accepted. The Board by its Resolution decided that the candidates for the different examinations conducted by the Board, shall be allowed to appear on such examination in their respective old courses for a period of two years after introduction of the respective new courses. The Board’s decision was also followed by the Resolution of the Education Committee. It appears from the proceeding of the 43rd Second General Body Meeting of the Board dated 27.10.1999, copy of which is Annexure-A/1, that the new syllabus for the Secondary Training School and D.I.E.T.’s of the State for the academic session 1999-2000 along with the new text books shall be introduced. The Education Committee in its Resolution dated 13.8.1999 also resolved that the new syllabus and the text books be introduced from academic session 1999-2000 for the first year and academic session 2000-2001 for the second year and by Resolu¬tion of the C.T. Selection Committee, the new syllabus and text books were decided to be implemented for the academic session 1999-2000. It further appears from Annexure-D/1 series, the instruction to the Heads of the Institution for C.T./E.T. H.T.C. and C.P.E.D. Examination, 2001 at Clause-9 that after C.T. Exami¬nation, 2001 no question from old course will be set for C.T. Examination, 2003 and onwards. The petitioner took the C.T. Examination in 2000 and having failed, repeated the same in 2001in the old course and again took the C.T. Examination 2002, wherein she earned eligibility to appear at the compartmental examination. The petitioner took the C.T. Examination in 2000 and having failed, repeated the same in 2001in the old course and again took the C.T. Examination 2002, wherein she earned eligibility to appear at the compartmental examination. The old course in which the petitioner appeared having been decided to be closed from 2002 and the petitioner was aware of such course, but took the risk of appearing at the old course in 2001 examination by which time, the new course had already come into force, she cannot claim that in view of her eligibility she is to be allowed to take the compartmental exami¬nation under the old course. The petitioner has already availed three chances. The Regulation referred to, entitles a person to avail chance of appearing at the compartmental examination but that always is subject to the condition that such an examination is available under the course. In such view of the matter, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the action of the opposite party-Board in refusing the petitioner to take the compartmental examination, 2003. However, it is open to the petitioner to make a representa¬tion for appearing at the examination in the new course within a week hence. If such a representation is filed, the Board Authori¬ty shall consider the same and if she is fond eligible to appear the examination, she may be permitted to take the examination on payment of required fees. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Application disposed of.