IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 382 OF 2019 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN:
MS. KRUTHI. R. M. D/O DR.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS R/AT NO.144, 7TH WARD, KOTHAPALLI ROAD, BAGYAPALLI TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 207 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUNIYAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE 4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 041 BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR 2. THE REGISTRAR - EVALUATION RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE, 4TH T BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 041 BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N K RAMESH, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO REFERE THE ANSWER SCRIPTS OF THE PETITIONER FOR REVALUATION AS PER THE NOTIFICATION / ORDINANCE DATED 15.6.2012 AT ANNEX-D OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE REFER IT TO A BOARD /PANEL OF EVALUATORS OF NOT LESS THAN THREE EVALUATORS;
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER The petitioner, a First Year student of MBBS is before this Court seeking a direction to the respondent – University to refer her answer scripts for third valuation as per the University Valuation Ordinance relating to valuation contending that the percentage difference between the first valuation and the second valuation is more than 15%.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the question raised in this writ petition is answered by this Court in its judgment dated 21.12.2018 in cognate W.P.Nos.48194-48198/2018 and other connected matters wherein the operative portion reads as under:
“In the above circumstances, these writ petitions succeed in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent-University to send such of the Answer Papers of the petitioners only, wherein the percentage difference amongst the valuations (two in the case of U.G. course and four in the case of P.G. course, as the case may be) in terms of 15.06.2012 Ordinance as worked out in paragraphs 25 and 26 (supra) for third or fifth valuation as the case may be, forthwith.”
3. On request, the learned Senior Panel Counsel Sri. N.K.Ramesh, having accepted notice for the respondents does not much dispute the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner. However, he submits that the liberty should be reserved to the second respondent – Registrar to workout whether the percentage difference of marks between the two evaluations is 15% or more; if it is found that the said difference is more than 15%, then there would be no impediment for the respondents to refer the answer scripts of the petitioner relating to the subjects pertaining to Anatomy-I paper having Q.P.Code No. 1075 MBBS, Anatomy – II paper having Q.P. Code No. 1076 MBBS and Physiology paper having Q.P. Code No. 1078 MBBS in terms of the Ordinance in question.
4. In view of the above, this writ petition succeeds in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondents to refer the above three subject answer scripts of the petitioner for third valuation if percentage difference after calculation works out to be 15% or more as between the first and second valuations and not as against the maximum marks prescribed for the papers in question. Time for compliance four weeks.
Till after and subject to the result of the third evaluation comes out in terms of the direction above, the petitioner shall be permitted to attend the classes for the second year MBBS Course, subject to the order that no plea of equity shall be put forth on the basis of this adhoc arrangement.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE Bsv