Back
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Y. S. R. University of Health Sciences – Appellant
Versus
B. Sanju Sudha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ.
The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order, dated 22.08.2023, passed in W.P. No.15426 of 2023, whereby while allowing the writ petition, the learned single Judge has directed the re-evaluation of the answer scripts of the petitioner in respect of General Medicine Papers - I and II by a third examiner.
With a view to understand the background in which the present controversy has arisen, it is necessary to give in brief the material facts.
2. The petitioner was admitted to the MBBS course in the year 2018. She appeared in the final year MBBS examination conducted in the month of December, 2022, and is stated to have failed in the subject of General Medicine. The petitioner applied for recounting of the marks as per the statutes, which did not result in any change in her result. She then applied for verification of her papers - I and II in the subject of General Medicine and was called to verify her answer scripts.
The petitioner's stand before the learned single Judge was that upon verification of the answer scripts, she noticed that only 0.5 marks had been allotted to her in regard to a question which carr
Re-evaluation of answer scripts is only permissible when the difference in marks exceeds 20%, as per statutory provisions.
Non-mentioning of remarks on digital answer sheets by examiners amounts to non-evaluation, and violates the guidelines issued by the university and the observations made in earlier decisions.
The non-mentioning of remarks on the answer sheets amounted to non-evaluation.
Digital evaluation process - Absence of a provision for revaluation cannot be a shield for the examiner to arbitrarily evaluate the answer scripts and it would be against the very concept for which r....
Point of law: Award of marks by an examiner has to be fair and considering the fact that re-evaluation is not permissible under the Statute at the instance of candidate, the examiner has to be carefu....
Absence of a provision for revaluation cannot be a shield for the examiner to arbitrarily evaluate the answer scripts and it would be against the very concept for which revaluation is impermissible’
Re-evaluation of answer scripts – In absence of any provision for re-evaluation in relevant rules, examinees have no right to claim or demand re-evaluation – Sympathy or compassion does not play any ....
The non-mentioning of remarks on the answer scripts by the examiners amounts to non-evaluation of the answer scripts.
Point of law: It is the legitimate expectation of the students that the answers written are atleast looked at and appreciated for evaluation and in the case on hand, the script answer reports are tre....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
