Point of Law – Courts will interfere only if they find all or any of the following: (i) violation of any enactment, statutory Rules and Regulations; (ii) mala fides or ulterior motives to assist or enable private gain to someone or cause prejudice to anyone; or where the procedure adopted is arbitrary and capricious.

ORDER :

These writ petitions are filed questioning the Ordinance dated 1.2.2021 on the ground that it is incomplete, arbitrary and seeks to in

fuse inequality and therefore, is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are also seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondents to conduct fresh evaluation of their answer scripts pertaining to 1st year MBBS Phase-I.

2. The common grievance of the petitioners in the present batch of writ petitions is that respondents for the purpose of evaluation of answer scripts have promulgated ordinance governing Central Assessment Program[CAP] for theory paper assessment of MBBS course, which is applicable to the examinations conducted on or after 1.2.2021. The petitioners contend that the impugned Ordinance has resulted in gross discrimination between the nature of evaluation, consideration of marks and also yardstick which is proposed to be adopted for ironing out the differences in evaluation. They further contend that on account of impugned Ordinance, they have lost few marks. The petitioners also claim that they would have automatically passed being eligible as per Regulation of Graduate Medical Education 1997, which provides grace marks up to maximum of five marks and if applied, would have cleared the examination as a whole.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently argue and contend before this Court that the amended 2019 Ordinance runs contrary to the several directions issued by this Court. The counsel would further contend that the impugned Ordinance is issued without seeking opinion of expert body and therefore, it does not augur well for the future medical education. The petitioners grievance is that the students community should have also been heard in the matter. He further contends that the impugned Ordinance lacks broad vision and therefore, the same is susceptible as it does not satisfy the Constitutional mandate.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Sri. Nanjunda Reddy, reiterating the defence taken in the statement of objections would submit that the earlier Ordinances dated 29.3.2019 and 13.10.2020 were subject matter of batch of writ petitions and the Regulations were quashed by this Court in W.P.No.31335/2019 and W.P.No.231/2021. The respondents have promulgated the impugned Ordinance so as to keep the system in place thereby the majority of the students are not put to hardship. The learned counsel would also place reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.31335/2019 and submit that this Court has observed that "it is open for the University to promulgate similar Ordinance and may adopt double valuation under new amended MCI Regulations".

5. Learned Senior Counsel would also place reliance on the amended Regulations of Graduate Medical Education Regulation, 1997 which was brought into force w.e.f. 6.11.2019 and therefore, submits that the students admitted for the academic year 2019-20 onwards are bound by the amended Regulations under Clause 11.2.9(j). The learned Senior Counsel would also lay emphasis in promulgating the impugned Ordinance by respondents. He would submit to this Court that as the examination process have commenced which was first annual examinations for the students appearing under the amended MCI Regulations, it was well within the discretion and powers conferred on the Vice-Chancellor under Section 13(2) of Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1994 (for short "RGUHS Act, 1994") to introduce the impugned Ordinance in the meeting of the Committee of Academic Council which was held on 1.2.2021. He would submit that after deliberations, the Ordinance introduced by the Vice-Chancellor was approved by the Committee of Academic Council. The new Ordinance which has introduced the new policy of assessment of theory answer scripts is strictly in consonance with the MCI Advisory and therefore, the petitioners who are students have no locus standi to qu