Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for the issuance of a certificate taking into consideration the highest marks awarded by the first respondent and for a consequential direction to issue the certificate to the petitioner containing the marks obtained in the original valuation before her papers were revalued. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission on 18.7.2012, this court directed the learned Special government Pleader to get instructions from the respondents. Accordingly, when the matter came up on 26.07.2012, Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader (Education) produced a copy of the G.O.(Ms)No.77, School Education Department, dated 7.5.2001 relating to revaluation of higher secondary marks in Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. Under the said G.O., it was stated that once revaluation is accepted, then the revaluation mark is the final mark and it cannot be further reconsidered by the authorities. 3. The case of the petitioner was that she had initially secured 193 marks in Physics and 195 marks in Biology, but she thought she would get higher marks. Hence she had applied for revaluation. After revaluation was done, her marks in the Physics went down to 190, whereas Biology marks remained 195. Disappointed by the revaluation, she had wanted to have the original marks to be retained. Her cut-off mark before revaluation was worked out to 195.5 and that she would have been eligible for admission to Government aided colleges for doing MBBS course. 4. But, it must be noted that revaluation cannot be done in the absence of rule as a matter of right as held by the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth reported in (1984) 4 SCC 27 . Further, the Supreme Court in Board of Secondary Education v. Pravas Ranjan Panda reported in (2004) 13 SCC 383 held that in the absence of any rule, no revaluation is permissible. 5. Therefore, the petitioner having opted to go for revaluation have practically to accept and abide by the rule of revaluation. Once the papers were revalued, these revalued marks which matters and not the marks earlier obtained. They can work in both ways, i..e, either advantage to the petitioner or disadvantage. But the results are immaterial as the petitioner had taken a calculated risk in getting her papers revalued. Once the papers were revalued, these revalued marks which matters and not the marks earlier obtained. They can work in both ways, i..e, either advantage to the petitioner or disadvantage. But the results are immaterial as the petitioner had taken a calculated risk in getting her papers revalued. The petitioner's counsel also produced the valued papers to show that they could be sent for another valuation by the person to be appointed by the court. Such a course of action is not permissible in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Mukesh Thakur reported in (2010) 6 SCC 759 . 6. In view of the above, there is no case made out by the petitioner. Hence the writ petition will stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.