ORDER

The petitioner, Bhushan Uttam Khare, appeared for the Third Year M.B.B.S. Examination held by University of Poona in the months of October-November, 1990. The results of the said examination were declared on 12-12-1990. As per University of Poona Ordinance, 134A, the petitioner applied for revaluation of his answer papers. 167 students including the petitioner had applied for revaluation. When the revaluation results were declared, certain students made representation to the University authorities for their answer papers being revalued from the same set of examiners.

2. On receipt of the representation, the Executive Council of University appointed a Committee to make an enquiry. On the report of the Committee, the University of Poona decided to cancel the revaluation results and to conduct further revaluation. This decision of the Executive Council cancelling the earlier revaluation and directing a second revaluation was challenged by the petitioner and others in writ petitions filed before the High Court at Bombay. By the impugned judgment dated May 3, 1991 the High Court dismissed the writ petitions. Aggrieved by the decision, the petitioner has moved this petition for special leave.

3. The Poona University Act, 1974 defines the power and duties of the Executive Council. The Executive Council may make Ordinances to provide for the conduct of examinations. Under Ordinance 134A, the Vice-Chancellor shall use his discretionary powers to decide as to whether all the applications received from the candidates, considered for revaluation or not. If as a result of revaluation of answer-books, the marks obtained by the candidate increase over the original marks by 10% or more of the marks carried by the paper then only the result of revaluation will be accepted by the University. Application for verification of answerbooks will be entertained within a period of two weeks from the date of declaration of the results.

Ordinance 146 reads-

"246. In any case where it is found that the result of an examination has been affected by error, malpractice, fraud, improper conduct or other course of whatsoever nature, the Executive Council shall have power to amend such result in such manner as shall be in accord with the true position and to make such declaration as the Executive Council shall consider necessary in that behalf. Provided that, but subject to Ordinance 147 no result shall be amended after the expiration of, six months from the date of publication of the said result."

4. In the Third Year M.B.B.S. Examination, 402 students appeared for the examination and 167 students applied for revaluation of the answer books. When the representation of students opting for revaluation was placed before the Executive Council as glaring difference was indicated (sic) was appointed for scrutiny and to reassess theory papers of the students acquiring more than 20% marks after revaluation, from senior teachers of the Faculty. After scrutiny, it was found out that the marks are closer to the original marks in Medicine, Surgery and Preventive and Social Medicine. Therefore, the Committee recommended that the entire revaluation of the papers should be cancelled. This report of the Committee was placed before the Executive Council in its meeting held on March 27, 1991 and the Council by the resolution cancelled the result of the revaluation and directed fresh revaluation. The second revaluation was done through the examiners outside the State.

5. The results on revaluation intimated to the Medical College thus stood cancelled and the final results were declared in pursuance to the second revaluation. The action of the Executive Council was attacked on the grounds that it was an arbitrary action; that the choice of the examiners was that of the Vice-Chancellor as enjoined under the Ordinance and there was no glaring instance of any malpractice, fraud or other course of whatsoever nature to cancel the revaluation and in the absence of any provision in the