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

2017 Supreme(AP) 443

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J.
Dr. J. Kiran Kumar and others - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Medical, Health and Family Welfare (E1) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi and others - Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 23681, 24393, 24394, 24395, 24468, 24558, 26563, 26728, 30422, 30442, 30486, 30790, 30951, 31188 and 31284 of 2017
Decided On : 23-10-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Sri Kiran Tirumalasetti, Sri Sreenivas Padala, Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, Sri K.R. Prabhakar, Sri Raja Reddy Koneti
For the Respondents: Sri Taddi Nageswara Rao

Headnote:

Education – Digital evaluation of their answer scripts – Petitioners are students pursuing Post-graduate Medical Degree/Diploma Courses in the Colleges affiliated to the second respondent University. They appeared for the final year examinations conducted - After the announcement of the results when they were declared to have been failed, the present Writ Petitions are filed challenging the method of digital evaluation and denial of re-totalling of the marks. It appears that most of the candidates paid an amount of Rs.2,000/- for re-totalling, but in view of the digital evaluation the re-totalling was not permitted – Held, method adopted by the University is contrary to the Regulations and there is large scale violation of the resolutions passed by the Executive Council in respect of valuation of answer scripts as pointed out in respect of the subject of General Medicine and occurring in other subjects also, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the valuation done to the answer scripts of the petitioners is invalid and, accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed. The second respondent University is directed to revalue the theory answer scripts of the petitioners and other failed candidates who have appeared for the examination by two external examiners and two internal examiners in consonance with Regulation 14(1)(b) of the Medical Council of India Regulations and declare their results as expeditiously as possible. The Oral/clinical marks already obtained by the candidates shall be taken into account for the purpose of declaration of results. The supplementary examinations shall be conducted only after declaration of their results - Petition allowed

Order :

“If we assess today’s students as we assessed yesterdays, we rob them of tomorrow”

- John Dewey.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences.

2. The petitioners are students pursuing Post-graduate Medical Degree/Diploma Courses in the Colleges affiliated to the second respondent University. They appeared for the final year examinations conducted in May/June 2017. After the announcement of the results when they were declared to have been failed, the present Writ Petitions are filed challenging the method of digital evaluation and denial of re-totalling of the marks. It appears that most of the candidates paid an amount of Rs.2,000/- for re-totalling, but in view of the digital evaluation the re-totalling was not permitted.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the digital evaluation is not evolved in a foolproof manner in spite of the orders of this Court in Dr. P. Kishore Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2016 (6) ALT 408 and in W.P.No.7119 of 2017 and batch dated 04.04.2017. It is their further case that at the time of issuing notification or at the time of issuing Hall tickets they were not put on notice with regard to digital evaluation of their answer scripts and since the said system is not foolproof their failure was the result of such system of evaluation.

4. Initially, a counter affidavit was filed by the Registrar stating that the digital valuation was introduced for the P.G Degree/Diploma examinations held in May/June 2016. The pilot project was initially entrusted to M/s. Globarena Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad which has done online valuation of 84 scripts during October 2015 P.G. examinations as pilot project on experimental basis and the Professors who valued the scripts expressed their satisfaction on online valuation and opined that online valuation is beneficial when compared to OMR filling and it is a time saving process. As per the existing practice, after completion of the examinations, the answer scripts are received by the University from the Colleges. After completion of tearing work, the scripts are handed over to the said agency for scanning work. After scanning the answer scripts, they were sent to all Medical Colleges through online for digital valuation. The scanning was done by the book scan and not sheet scanning i.e., the OMR answer books and additional answer books are scanned without cutting them into sheets. Before starting digital valuation, instructions and guidelines were issued to the Principals, Camp Officers and Examiners on digital valuation of PG answer scripts. The digital valuation is same as manual valuation as per double valuation regulations. The first valuation was done at the time of practicals and the second valuation was done later. If there is more than 20% difference between the first valuation ad second valuation, the scripts are sent to the third valuation to other examiners who were not involved in the first two valuations. If there is no variation of 20% marks in the first two valuations, the average marks would be taken as marks secured by the candidate. In case of variation after third valuation, the average of the third valuation and the nearest of marks of either first or second valuation to the third valuation will be taken into consideration. The valuing illustration with regard to valuation is given as follows:

 

1st

2nd

3rd

 

 

 

For eg:

71

51

56

107/2

53.5

54

If the variation among 1st and 2nd valuations is same when compared with 3rd valuation, highest marks out of 1st & 2nd valuation and 3rd valuation marks will be taken into consideration.

 

1st

2nd

3rd

 

 

 

For eg:

58

34

46 #i.e.

58+46/2

104/2

52

5.

































































































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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top