Karnataka High Court
Ms Shifa Bathool vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health ... on 13 January, 2023
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
WP No. 24496 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 24496 OF 2022 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
MS.SHIFA BATHOOL
D/O.SYED ZAHEERUDDIN SURKHI
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/A NO.4, 8TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN
OPP. TO ADA RAMESH NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 037
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI KARTHIK C. FOR
SRI. NISHANTH A V., ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF
HEALTH SCIENCES (RGUHS)
OFFICE AT:4TH T BLOCK EAST
PATTABHIRAMA NAGAR
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
Digitally
2. THE REGISTRAR(EVALUATION)
signed by B RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF
LAVANYA HEALTH SCIENCES
Location:
HIGH OFFICE AT:4TH T BLOCK EAST
COURT OF PATTABHIRAMA NAGAR
KARNATAKA
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS TO REFER THE PAPERS VIDE Q.P.CODE-
1190/PAEDIATRIC AND PREVENTIVE DENTISTRY IN ANSWER
-2-
WP No. 24496 of 2022
BOOKLET NO.XXXXXXX848, VIDE ANNEXURE-C TO THE 3RD
VALUATION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner, who is 4th year Bachelor of Dental Surgery ('BDS' for short) student of Al- Ameen Dental College and Hospital, Vijayapura. The petitioner had taken RS3 examination conducted by respondent No.1- University in the month of September, 2022 and having appeared in the said examination, was declared failed in three subjects.
2. It is the contention of Sri Karthik C., learned counsel for petitioner that he had answered the question paper and was expecting higher marks. However, he has failed in three subjects. After noting the results, he made a representation by way of e-mail to the respondent-University on 19.10.2022 requesting conducting of revaluation and the same has not been considered, for which, the petitioner approached this Court in WP.No.21331/2022 for considering his representation for revaluation, which was allowed and direction was given to the respondent-University to consider the representation of the -3- WP No. 24496 of 2022 petitioner. While considering the representation, respondent No.2 issued an endorsement dated 28.11.2022 by referring to a notification dated 29.03.2019. Aggrieved by the issuance of the said endorsement at Annexure-H dated 28.11.2022, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Ms.Farah Fathima, learned counsel for respondents has filed statement of objections and has also relied on the Regulations of BDS Course enumerated therein with regard to revaluation of theory papers in all years of study of BDS course may be permissible by the University on application and remittance of a prescribed fee. It is further contended that such answer script shall be re-evaluated by not less than two duly qualified examiners and the average obtained shall be awarded to the candidate and the result accordingly reconsidered. However, in the case where there is double evaluation provision exists, this provision of re-evaluation will not be applicable to the petitioner. She further relies on the Ordinance dated 05.09.2022, which comes into force on 01.09.2022 as well as revised endorsement dated 09.01.2023, which would be applicable to the petitioner herein as he has taken up examination in September 2022 wherein at Clauses-4 -4- WP No. 24496 of 2022 and 5 of the Ordinance, the valuation procedure is prescribed, which reads as under:
"4. PROCEDURE FOR VALUATION:
All answer scripts of all undergraduate health sciences courses of RGUHS be subjected to general evaluation by the first eligible examiner and re- evaluation by the second eligible examiner of the respective faculties through the digital valuation system before the computation of results.
5. PROCEDURE FOR COMPUTATION OF RESULTS:
The highest of the total marks awarded by either of the two evaluators i.e., best total marks awarded by any of the two evaluators of the paper shall be considered for computation of the results. If any decimals occurring during individual evaluator total marks awarded by the examiner shall be rounded off to the next higher value for the purpose of computation of results."
3.1. Learned counsel for respondents relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dr.NTR University of Health Sciences vs. Dr.Yerra Trinadh & Others [Civil Appeal No.8037/2022; DD: 04.11.2022], which referred to several judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman, Bihar -5- WP No. 24496 of 2022 Public Service Commission, Patna & Others [(2004)6 SCC 714], which runs to Vikesh Kumar Gupta & Another v.
State of Rajasthan & Others [(2021)2 SCC 309], which has consistently held that the High Court should not enter into the forte of experts on the educational side to re-evaluate the answer scripts and in the absence of any such provision provided in the relevant rules and regulations, this Court should refrain from interfering with such areas of re-evaluation of answer scripts.
4. Considering the Ordinance dated 05.09.2022 as well as revised endorsement dated 09.01.2023, there is no provision for re-evaluation to be conducted further, as in the present case, the double re-evaluation procedure has already been adopted.
5. Placing the submission of learned counsel for respondent and the statement of objections filed by her, the petition is liable for dismissal. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Learned counsel for petitioner seeks leave of this Court to challenge the said Ordinance dated 05.09.2022 as well as revised endorsement dated 09.01.2023 filed by learned counsel -6- WP No. 24496 of 2022 for respondents. He is at liberty to do so, as it is his inherent right.
Sd-
JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40