JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. D.C. Roy, learned counsel appearing vice Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3. 2. All these writ petitions being W.P. (C) No. 1229 of 2016 [Smt. Amrita Das vs. State of Tripura and Others], W.P. (C) No. 1230 of 2016 [Sri. Pranjit Das vs. State of Tripura and Others], W.P. (C) No. 1231 of 2016 [Smt. Deeppriya Paul vs. State of Tripura and Others] and W.P. (C) No. 1251 of 2016 [Sri. Shahanur Miah Khadim vs. State of Tripura and Others] are clustered for disposal by a common judgment as there is a consensus in the Bar that all these writ petitions are covered by the judgment and order dated 05.10.2016 delivered in W.P. (C) No. 1167 of 2016 by this Court. There is no dispute also that the petitioners are similarly situated with that of the petitioner of W.P. (C) No. 1167 of 2012 [Smt. Rimi Saha vs. State of Tripura and Others]. By the judgment dated 05.10.2016, this Court has observed as under: “It is an admitted position that the TBSE has taken a decision to award 12 marks per subject and in total 40 marks to a candidate to enable him/her to reach the standard pass mark of 21. TBSE also has decided that the grace marks will be given to those candidates who got at least 9 marks in elective subjects to avail the concession of grace marks. Since the petitioner did not get 9 marks in Physics she was not awarded the concession of grace marks. She applied for review of result of Physics and Chemistry and after review TBSE issued a fresh mark sheet wherein her marks in Physics was increased to 9 and Chemistry to 20. Since she got minimum bench mark 9 for getting the benefits of the grace marks, she was entitled to the grace marks in both Physics and Chemistry and in that case she would pass the examination. TBSE refused to give her the grace marks since at the inception when the mark sheet was issued she did not get 9 marks in Physics. TBSE refused to give her the grace marks since at the inception when the mark sheet was issued she did not get 9 marks in Physics. While her result has been reviewed and new mark sheet has been issued the earlier mark sheet has to be treated as non-est. Since after review the petitioner came within the purview of the minimum standard mark as fixed by the Board she is entitled to get the concession of grace mark of 12 in Physics and Chemistry and so the Board is directed to give concession of grace marks to the petitioner as has been given to other candidates in the subject of Physics and Chemistry and thereafter be issued a new mark sheet to the petitioner within 45 days from today.” 3. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 has fairly submitted that in these cases, the Tripura Board of Secondary Education refused to give the grace marks to the petitioners even though after the review, the petitioners have come within the purview of having grace marks. As a result, the respondent No. 3 is directed to add the grace marks to the marks secured by the petitioners as per the decision of the Tripura Board of Secondary Education for the said examination where the petitioners have appeared. The new mark-sheet thereafter shall be issued to the petitioners within a period of 45(forty five) days from today. 4. With this observation and direction, these writ petitions stand allowed to the extent as indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs.