Karnataka High Court
Mr Preshit Gupta vs The Director on 22 July, 2013
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, Ravi Malimath
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2013
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
WRIT PETITION NO.29667 OF 2013(EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
Mr.Preshit Gupta
Aged about 19 years
S/o Dr.Narendra Kumar Gupta
Permanent Resident of C-R-1, J.D.Hospital,
Shaheed Nagar, Agra - 282 001.
Presently residing at
3rd Floor, H.No.13, 5th Cross,
Srinivasa Reddy Layout,
11th Main Hongasandra,
Bangalore - 560 068. ...PETITIONER
2
(By Sri M.G.Kumar, Advocate for M/s.H.G.Kumar Law
Firm, Advocates)
AND:
1. The Director
The Consortium of Medical, Engineering
And Dental College of Karnataka(COMEDK)
No.132, 2nd Floor,
11th Main, 17th Cross,
Malleshwaram,
Bangalore - 560 055.
2. The Vice Chancellar
Rajiv Gandhi University of Health
Science of Karnataka,
Having its office at 4th 'T' Block,
Jayanagar,
Bangalore - 560 004. ...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri Shashikiran Shetty, Advocate for R1
Sri N.K.Ramesh, Advocate for R2)
*****
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the
respondents to bring the entire COMEDK test script
with respect to the petitioners register No.104274 is
concerned for the year 2013 conducted by the
respondents and peruse the records so for as the
3
petitioners queries raised at Annexure-C to L is
concerned etc.,
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day,
K.L.Manjunath J., delivered the following:-
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, by consent of the parties, we have heard this appeal on merits.
2. The petitioner is a resident of Agra. After completing 12th standard examination he appeared for entrance examination conducted by the first respondent-Association. The entrance examination was held on 12.05.2013. The results of the entrance examination was announced 11.06.2013, in which he secured rank of 3400. The first respondent announced 4 the key answers. On noticing the key answers published by the first respondent, he questioned the correctness of the key answers in regard to 10 questions, five key answers in Chemistry and five in Biology as wrong.
3. The first respondent on considering the questions raised by the petitioner came to the conclusion that out of 10 questions, three questions were correct. Accordingly, three marks were given to the petitioner. The first respondent rejected the contention of the petitioner with regard to the remaining 7 questions.
4. The petitioner filed the instant writ petition requesting the Court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to produce all the answers scripts pertaining to the petitioner and to issue directions to make necessary corrections in the answer 5 sheet and permit him to appear for the counseling for M.B.B.S. seat for the academic year 2013-2014. According to him, the key answers announced by the first respondent were not correct with regard to all the 10 questions and that he was entitled for seven more marks.
5. We had directed the learned counsel appearing for the respondent's to take notice on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2. Accordingly, they have taken notice.
6. Shri.Shashi Kiran Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent requested the Court to permit him to ascertain the opinion of experts on the questions raised by the petitioner in order to prove that the key answers published by the first respondent as correct. Accordingly, time was granted to him. We had 6 also directed the petitioner to produce the text books on which he is placing reliance to justify his contention in respect of all the questions raised by him. Accordingly, both of them have furnished the details. On furnishing the details, we have noticed that out of 7 questions raised by the petitioner, 3 were correct and remaining 4 are to be rejected.
7. So far as three questions are concerned, Question No.84 in Chemistry: "An organic acid without carboxylic acid group is:" According to the first respondent 'Picric acid' is the correct answer. According to the petitioner 'Ascorbic Acid' is the correct answer. By looking into the text book relied upon by the petitioner, we are of the opinion that 'Ascorbic Acid' is the correct answer and the key answer published by the first respondent is incorrect. Accordingly, he is entitled for the mark concerning the said question. 7
8. Similarly, in regard to Question No.23 of Biology: "Green House Gases are:", the key answer according to the first respondent is 'CO2 and CH2' . The petitioner has answered as 'N2O and CFCs'. Both parties have produced the text books to show the correctness of the key answers. On verification of the text books produced the parties, it is clear that 'CO2 and CH2' cannot be correct as published by the first respondent. Because even according to the text books relied upon by the first respondent, the correct answer is 'CO2 and CH4' , when CH4 is not there in the options, then the answer akin to the question is 'N2O and CFCs' as answered by the petitioner. Therefore, he is entitled for the mark. According to us, all the four answers given in the question are not the full and correct answer. 8
9. In regard to question no.46 in Biology:
"Coronary Bypass involves: (a) removal of the defective artery, (b) replacement of the valves, (c) replacement of defective veins, (d) None of these." On considering the text book produced by both the parties, we are of the view that the petitioner's answer is none of these and the same is the correct answer. Therefore, he is entitled for one more mark in regard to the said question. In the circumstance, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for three more marks in respect of these questions and other contentions of the petitioner requires to be rejected.
10. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one question in Physics i.e., Question No.112, was answered by him correctly and in the key answers published by the first respondent the said answers was held to be correct and while later 9 considering the objection's raised by other students, the said answer is held to be incorrect. Therefore, we cannot consider the said question because if the petitioner was of the opinion of changing of the key answer by the first respondent was incorrect, he should have rushed to the court immediately or he should have given a representation to the first respondent. The same has not been done having not done so earlier, when the first respondent has proceeded with the counseling process, if we ask the first respondent to relook into the matter, it is nothing but opening a Pandora's Box. It would affect the entire results of COMED-K and the students who are not before this Court. Therefore, the said contention is rejected.
11. In the result, the petition is allowed in part. The first respondent is to directed to consider his three answers as correct answers and alter the ranking of the 10 petitioner and permit him for counseling and allot a seat on merits and in accordance with the law..
Parties to bear their costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE JJ