Madras High Court
R.Naveen Kumar vs The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical ... on 6 February, 2015
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 06.02.2015
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam
Writ Petition No.1375 of 2015
R.Naveen Kumar ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University,
rep. by its Registrar, No.69, Anna Salai,
Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The Controller of Examinations,
Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University,
No.69, Anna Salai,
Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
3. ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR,
rep. by its Dean,
K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078. ...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent-University to subject the petitioner's (Register No.521326058) answer scripts in the examination held in November, 2014, in Anatomy Papers 1 and II and Biochemistry Papers 1 and II for second evaluation as per the regulations of the respondent-University and consequently, to award average marks of both the valuations to the petitioner and consequently, to declare the revised result of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy
For Respondents1 & 2: Mr.Sanjay Ramasamy
Standing Counsel
O R D E R
The prayer sought for in the Writ Petition, is for issuance of Mandamus, directing the respondent-Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, to conduct second evaluation of the petitioner's answer scripts in the examination held in November, 2014, in Anatomy Papers 1 and II and Biochemistry Papers 1 and II.
2. Mr.Sanjay Ramasamy, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-University submitted that there is no provision for second valuation/double valuation, and the provision has been done away with and resolution has also been passed by the Standing Academic Board to that effect. Therefore, the prayer sought for, by the petitioner cannot be granted.
3. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the Standing Academic Board, in its 47th Meeting held on 18.12.2013, in Agenda No.47 (11) considered the recommendations of the Board of Studies in Super Specialty, passed in its meeting held on 06.11.2013. One of the issues, which was taken up for consideration is with regard to the guidelines for double valuation, if prescribed by their respective Councils. In the said meeting, the following decisions were taken under the heading, Any other items:-
"1. It was resolved that from February/2014/April 2014 sessions onwards, only single valuation will be done for all Undergraduate, Post Graduate and Super Specialty Degree Courses, unless, the Double Valuation is advised by the respective Councils.
Guidelines for Double Valuation,if prescribed by their respective Councils.
Answer scripts of the candidates, who have failed in the first valuation will be subject to second valuation.
The average marks of the two valuations will be considered for processing the results.
If the difference of marks between the two valuations is more than 30% then the answer scripts be subject to third valuation and the best of two valuations among the three will be considered for processing the results.
The Dental Council of India has prescribed that, in Universities, where double evaluation provision exists, the provision of revaluation is not applicable.. Therefore, for B.D.S. Degree course, the theory answer scripts of all the candidates, who have scored less than 35 marks in a maximum of 70 marks paper and less than 18 marks in a maximum of 35 marks paper, be subjected for second valuation. The average of the two scores be considered as the marks obtained for processing the results.
2. It has been resolved that, once hall ticket is issued by the University to a candidate, based on his/her application for Examination submitted along with necessary fee forwarded by the College, it will be treated as an attempt, irrespective of the fact whether the candidate is actually appearing for the Examination or not due to any reason. Only when the candidate has taken up/appeared for any part of the Examination, it will be considered as an appearance.
3. From April, 2014 Examination sessions onwards, for all the Post Graduate Degree/Diploma Courses and Super Specialty, it has been decided to remove the component system of appearing in the Examination, following the norms of the respective Councils.
4. The fees for issue of Migration Certificate need to be collected along with the Examination fees and the Migration certificates shall be issued on receipt of application.
4. In terms of the above decision, it is seen that from February 2014 to April 2014 sessions onwards, only single valuation will be done for all Undergraduate, Post Graduate and Super Specialty Degree Courses, unless, the Double Valuation is advised by the respective Councils. In the same resolution, based on the advice given by the Junior Counsel of India, the second valuation has been permitted by the respondent-University. However, as on date, there is no proceeding, said to have been passed by the Medical Council of India, has been placed before this Court for consideration, wherein, there is any recommendation for second valuation. In such circumstance, the respondent-University cannot be compelled to conduct second valuation of the petitioner's answer scripts in subjects, where he has failed. However, the learned counsel for petitioner pleads that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to submit his representation before the Authorities concerned, who may be directed to consider the same in accordance with law. Even as per the resolution passed by the respondent-University, unless and until, their respective Council recommends for double valuation, the respondent-University cannot consider the petitioner's request.
5. Therefore, necessarily the petitioner has to approach the Medical Council of India. Accordingly, this Court, while dismissing the Writ Petition, is granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Medical Council of India, by way of representation with a copy marked to the respondent-University, and, if such representation is made to the Medical Council of India, the competent Authority of the Council shall consider the same, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. No costs.
06.02.2015 sd 3/3 Index : yes/no To
1. The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, rep. by its Registrar, No.69, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The Controller of Examinations, Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, No.69, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
3. ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR, rep. by its Dean, K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078.
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
sd Writ Petition.No.1375 of 2015 06.02.2015