SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(AP) 1017

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.S.A.SWAMY
Kumari Tan veer Fatima - Appellant
Versus
RREGISTRAR, N.T.R., UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES - Respondent
Decided On : 11-11-99

Headnote:

Re-valuation of Answersheet - Order while admitting writ petition directed counsel for respondent - University to produce answer script of petitioner in Opthalmology with Hall Ticke for verification of Court on payment of Rs. 5,000/ - by way of demand draft drawn in favour of Registrar, NTR University of Health Sciences, by petitioner - Accordingly, answer script was produced before this Court and having prima facie satisfied that paper was not properly valued, directed respondent-University to get paper valued by another reputed professor in Opthalmology in State and produce same to enable me to formulate relief - In fact, above direction seemed to have been assailed by filing writ appeal unsuccessfully - Thereafter, respondent-University sent paper for re-valuation - After re-valuation it is seen that while petitioner secured 19 marks in theory out of 50 marks, marks were improved in re-valuation to 26, i. e. , there is an increase of 7 marks after re-valuation of paper. Initially, petitioner was declared failed in examination on ground that she did not get minimum of 20 marks as per rules in vogue - Now, as petitioner secured 26 marks out of 50 marks in re-valuation respondents are bound to declare result of petitioner as passed in examination – Held , Accordingly , a direction is given to respondent-University to declare result of final year examination of petitioner on basis of marks obtained by her in re-valuation in Opthalmology as per direction of this Court within one week from date of receipt of a copy of order - AS petitioner paid examination fee for supplementary examination during pendency of writ petition, respondents are directed to refund amount and permit petitioner to undergo compulsory rotatory internship without further loss of time, and also as petitioner succeeded in writ petition, it is nothing but natural that she has to get back amount paid for getting answer script revalued under orders of this Court by way of demand draft in favour of Registrar of University, rs. S/ooo/ -. Same shall also be refunded within one week from date of receipt of a copy of order - Writ petition is allowed,

B. S. A. SWAMY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner, a final year M. B. B. S. , student filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to send her answer script/ paper in Opthalmology for final year examinations held in the month of April may 1999, for re-valuation and pass such other order or orders as this Hon ble court may be pleased to. deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

( 2 ) BY order dated 01-09-1999, while admitting the writ petition I directed the counsel for the respondent-University to produce the answer script of the petitioner in Opthalmology with Hall Ticket No. 9409137 for verification of the Court on payment of Rs. 5,000/ - by way of demand draft drawn in favour of the Registrar, NTR University of Health Sciences, by the petitioner. Accordingly, the answer script was produced before this Court on 09-09-1999 and having prima facie satisfied that the paper was not properly valued, I directed the respondent-University to get the paper valued by another reputed professor in Opthalmology in the State and produce the same to enable me to formulate the relief. In fact, the above direction seemed to have been assailed by filing writ appeal unsuccessfully. Thereafter, the respondent-University sent the paper for re-valuation. After re-valuation it is seen that while the petitioner secured 19 marks in the theory out of 50 marks, the marks were improved in the re-valuation to 26, i. e. , there is an increase of 7 marks after re-valuation of the paper. Initially, the petitioner was declared failed in the examination on the ground that she did not get the minimum of 20 marks as per the rules in vogue. Now, as the petitioner secured 26 marks out of 50 marks in the re-valuation the respondents are bound to declare the result of the petitioner as passed in the examination.

( 3 ) ACCORDINGLY, a direction is given to the respondent-University to declare the result of the final year examination of the petitioner on the basis of the marks obtained by her in re-valuation in Opthalmology as per the direction of this Court dated 01-09-1999 within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

( 4 ) AS the petitioner paid the examination fee for supplementary examination during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents are directed to refund amount and permit the petitioner to undergo compulsory rotatory internship without further loss of time, and also as the petitioner succeeded in the writ petition, it is nothing but natural that she has to get back the amount paid for getting the answer script revalued under the orders of this Court by way of demand draft in favour of Registrar of the University, rs. S/ooo/ -. The same shall also be refunded within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

( 5 ) BEFORE parting with the case, this Court came across such a situation in another case and the same is pending adjudication i. e. , W. P. No. 21048799. As the respondent-University is agreeable to frame guidelines for the guidance of the valuation officers, I would like to give certain guidelines tha t are passing in my mind, while disposing of that writ petition.

( 6 ) IN the result, the present writ petitioni sallowed, but, in the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top