IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA W.P.No.54013 OF 2017 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN:
Alakesh Priyam Saikia, S/o. Jagat Saikia Ageol, Aged about 22 years, R/at 8th Main, 10th Cross, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bangalore – 560 078. ... Petitioner (By Sri: Rajeh K.S., Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, M.S.Building, Bangalore – 560 001.
2. The Vice-Chancellor, Vishveswaraiah Technological University, Jnana Sangama, Machhe, Belagavi, Karnataka – 590 018.
3. The Registrar, Vishveswaraiah Technological University, Jnana Sangama, Machhe, Belagavi, Karnataka – 590 018.
4. The Principal, Dayanandasagar College of Engineering, Shavige Malleshwara Hills, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bangalore – 560 078. ... Respondents (By Smt: Pramodini Kishan, HCGP for R-1;
Sri Santosh S. Nagarale, Advocate for R-2 and R-3) ***** This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct R2 and R3 to revaluate petitioner’s 10ELE15 answer scripts at Annexure-B again, declare the result at the earliest thereby allowing him to appear for higher semester examinations, and etc., This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 University on advance notice as well as the learned Government Pleader for respondent No.1. As the prayer is sought as against respondent Nos. 2 and 3, notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with.
2. Petitioner’s grievance is that the respondent University has not revaluated petitioner’s answer scripts in ‘Basic Electrical Engineering’ in accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent University, who is appearing on advance notice, submits that there is no provision for fresh valuation of the revaluated answer scripts. However, there is a provision for challenge revaluation being sought by the petitioner. Such an opportunity is given to those students who were admitted in the academic year 2013-2014 and even prior to that, as in the instant case.
4. He further submits that if such an application is made, respondent University would consider the same in accordance with law and declare the results accordingly.
5. In the circumstances, petitioner is permitted to apply for challenge revaluation to the College and the respondent College would forward the said representation to the University forthwith. The University to consider the application for challenge revaluation in an expeditious manner having regard to the fact that the petitioner would have to appear for the Examination to be conducted in January 2018 and to declare results of the challenge revaluation to the petitioner. The petitioner to furnish a certified copy of this order to the fourth respondent Institute along with his application for challenge revaluation and also to the University.
6. Writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-