ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court alleging that the question papers of Physics and Chemistry have 11 and 17 repetitions respectively which has affected the evaluation of the examination held by the Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board, 2016. She had appeared at the examination Centre i.e. Gossner College, Ranchi on 12th June, 2016 to take the aforesaid exam comprising of two sessions, in the first Session-Biology and in the second Session-Physics and Chemistry. It is alleged by her that when she had appeared in the second session of physics and chemistry, she answered all questions given in the Question Booklet of “D” set, but to her utter surprise, she found 11 questions in Physics Paper and 17 questions in Chemistry Paper were exactly repeated along with same serial number. This statement is made at para 12 of the writ petition. She has stated further at para 13 that on utter frustration, she immediately informed the Invigilator at the Examination Centre regarding repetition of questions along with same serial numbers and requested for giving another set of question papers, but was denied the same. 3. On these facts, respondents have through their counter-affidavit, asserted on the one hand, that specific queries from the Centre Superintendent, Gossner College was made by Deputy Controller of Examination, J.C.E.C.E.B, Ranchi. It has transpired through his communication dated 24th June, 2016 that the allegation of the petitioner is wholly baseless. It is further stated in the said letter which is also supported by the statements made in the counter-affidavit that those candidates who had complained of defective set of Question Booklet within the time prescribed, were made available the proper set of question papers. Learned counsel for the Board has referred to Clause 4 of General Instructions contained in the Question Booklet at Annexure-A which reads as under: “There are 32 (27+5) pages in this Question Booklet including 1 page for General Instructions and blank pages for Rough Work. In case a candidate receives an incomplete or defective Question Booklet, he/she should make a request to the Room Invigilator to change the same within 10 minutes of start of the paper.” 4. It is stated that petitioner should have brought it to the notice of Room Invigilator to change the same within 10 minutes of receipt of defective Question Booklet, which she failed to do. It is stated that petitioner should have brought it to the notice of Room Invigilator to change the same within 10 minutes of receipt of defective Question Booklet, which she failed to do. Therefore, on such a request, no relief can be granted to the petitioner, at this stage, when results of the said exam are going to be published in immediate future. The entire examination process is to held as per schedule which follows counseling and admission within a particular deadline fixed by the Medical Council of India and approved by Apex court. 5. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment rendered by Apex Court in the case of Vikas Pratap Singh & Ors. vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. and analogous cases reported in (2013) 14 S.C.C. 494 . 6. Having considered the rival pleas of the parties in the light of the material facts pleaded, it is apparent from perusal of statements made at para 12 of the writ petition that petitioner had not noticed the defective Question Booklet till she answered all questions given in the Question Booklet of “D” Set. She, therefore, did not notice the defective Question Booklet within 10 minutes of start of the paper. The General Instruction contained in the Question Booklet applies to all appearing candidates and can not be derogated from. Therefore, petitioner's suffering cannot be remedied in any sense now under writ jurisdiction of this Court. 7. Reliance of the petitioner on the judgment rendered by Apex Court in the case of Vikas Pratap Singh & Ors (Supra) is misplaced as on perusal thereof it is found that marks of 8 objective type incorrect questions were awarded on pro rata basis while model answers of another 8 questions re-evaluated on basis of correct model answers. The Apex Court therefore found no irregularity in evaluation process. Here it is not a case that entire set of question papers allotted to each candidate contained certain incorrect questions which were answered one way or other by the appearing candidates and may have resulted in serious irregularities in the evaluation of said question papers. 8. Petitioner in the present case did not notice the defective set of question papers timely and did not make a request before Examination Centre Invigilator for supply of fresh question paper. 8. Petitioner in the present case did not notice the defective set of question papers timely and did not make a request before Examination Centre Invigilator for supply of fresh question paper. As a matter of Rule and Practice, seal of Question Booklet are opened just few minutes before schedule time of examinations and no one else is authorized to open seal of Question Booklet before that. Such defective Question Booklet therefore are unlikely to be noticed any time before the seals are broken by any one. Therefore, Clause 4 of General Instruction provides for replacement of Question Booklet if brought to the notice of the Room Invigilator within 10 minutes of start of paper. 9. This Court, therefore, does not find any reason to interfere in the matter and stop publication of result of Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board, 2016, and grant other consequential reliefs prayed for. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.