IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 6560 OF 2026

07.04.2026 Between:

Salman Mahmood ….. Petitioner And State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Medical, Health & Welfare Department & others.

….. Respondents

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of Respondent University in insisting that Petitioner should re- appear for all four theory papers along with practical/clinical and viva voce examinations in the Post Graduate Medical Examination conducted in October, 2025 for the course of M.D. Anesthesiology, on the ground that he failed Paper-I Basic Sciences and Applied Anatomy, despite having secured the requisite marks in the remaining papers. Petitioner seeks a declaration that such insistence is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and consequently seeks permission to re-appear only in respect of Paper-I.

2. Petitioner’s case is that, he is a medical graduate who completed M.B.B.S from the 4th respondent - Deccan College of Medical Sciences after securing a rank in EAMCET examination conducted upon completion of Intermediate education. Thereafter, Petitioner appeared for National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) conducted by the National Board of Examinations in 2022, secured a rank, and was admitted into the Post Graduate course in M.D. Anesthesiology at Deccan College of Medical Sciences, where he pursued studies for the academic period 2022 to 2025. Upon completion of the said course of three years, he appeared for the Post Graduate Medical Examination conducted by Respondent No.2 - University of Health Sciences in October, 2025, which comprised four theory papers, viz. Paper-I Basic Sciences and Applied Anatomy, Paper-II Systemic and Regional Anesthesia", Paper-III Systemic and Super Specialty Anesthesia and Paper-IV Recent Advances and ICU, along with practical and viva voce components; results were declared in November, 2025, wherein Petitioner secured 39 marks in Paper-I as against the minimum pass mark of 40, thereby failing by one mark.

2.1. It is stated, aggrieved by the said action, Petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 36837 of 2025 seeking, inter alia, declaration that detaining him by one mark is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and also sought production and inspection of his answer script. By order dated 04.02.2026, this Court permitted him to approach the Grievance Committee by paying requisite fees for verification of the answer scripts. Pursuant to the said order, he approached the Grievance Committee, and on inspection, it was found that in respect of Question No.6, though he answered the question, no marks whatsoever were awarded and there was no indication of evaluation by the examiner, not even a marking or notation, and the answer was awarded 'zero' marks.

2.2. According to petitioner, in a theory examination, once an answer is written, there must be some semblance of application of mind by the examiner while evaluating the same, and the absence of any marking whatsoever in respect of Question No.6 clearly indicates non-consideration of the answer. He places reliance upon Clause 8.4 of the Post- Graduate Medic Education Regulations, 2023 (for short, ‘the Regulations’) issued by the National Medical Commission, which governs valuation and evaluation of answer scripts. The said Clause provides for double valuation of answer scripts, computation of average marks, and further stipulates the criteria for evaluation of M.D. courses, including that there shall be four theory papers of 100 marks each, total 400 marks, with a passing minimum of 200/400 and a minimum of 40% in each paper, and that a candidate shall secure not less than 50% marks in each head of passing, including theory, practical/clinical and viva voce.

2.3. Petitioner relies upon Clause (3) of the criteria for evaluation, which states that if