Judgment : Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 3. The father of the petitioner has filed the affidavit in support of the writ petition. The petitioner, A.M.Dinesh, had written the Higher Secondary Examinations, held in the month of March, 2009, and he had obtained 1140 marks out of 1200 marks. The petitioner had applied for re-valuation in respect of Biology and English papers. In the re-valuation, five additional marks had been awarded in the English paper and two marks in the Biology paper. After re-valuation the total marks obtained by the petitioner is 1147. After re-valuation the petitioner has been awarded 195 marks out of 200 marks. The total marks allotted to Question No.37 in Zoology paper, is ten marks. However,the petitioner had been awarded only five marks for his answer to Question No.37, even though he is entitled for the full marks. If full marks had been awarded to the petitioner he would have secured sufficient cut off marks for getting admission for the M.B.B.S. Course, under the Backward Class community. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for re-valuation of the answer to Question 37 Part II-Zoology of the Biology paper of the Higher Secondary Examinations, conducted in the month of March, 2009. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court the following particulars, based on the instructions received by her from the respondents. "Routine management and disease explanation was not written As per the re-valuation done in respect of paper II-Zoology of the Biology paper of the petitioner, he is eligible for only five marks for the answer to Question No.37. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is clear that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason for this Court to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner, in the present writ petition. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is clear that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason for this Court to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner, in the present writ petition. In view of the particulars furnished by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, this Court is constrained to hold that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.