Karnataka High Court
Yejurva S Patil vs Rajiv Gandhi University on 8 June, 2018
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
WRIT PETITION No.24842/2018(EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
YEJURVA .S. PATIL
D/O SHANKARAGOWDA PATIL
AGED 20 YEARS
I YEAR MBBS,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR MEDICAL COLLEGE
BENGALURU.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHIVARUDRA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCES
REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR
4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 041.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI N.K. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT -
Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018
Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University
of Health Sciences
2/12
UNIVERSITY TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION
GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND
ANSWER SCRIPTS REFERRED TO IN ANNEXURE-A TO
D BE VALUED BY THE FOURTH/THIRD VALUER AS
THE CASE MAY BE.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Mr. Shivarudra, Adv. for Petitioner Mr.N.K.Ramesh, Adv. for Respondent No.1 The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the controversy in the present case is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court on 06.06.2018 in W.P.No.58414/2017 and Connected Matters .
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the representation of the petitioner for revaluation was rejected by the Respondent-University on 25.4.2018, but a detailed interim order was passed by this Court in that batch of cases on 26.4.2018, the Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 3/12 very next day and giving the benefit of that interim order, those writ petitions have been disposed of by this Court on 06.06.2018. The said order is quoted below for ready reference:
"ORDER After hearing the learned counsels on both sides, all these writ petitions are disposed of by a common order.
2. In some of these writ petitions, a detailed interim order was passed by this Court on 26.04.2018. The same is quoted below for ready reference:
"In pursuance of the order dated 24.4.2018, learned counsel for the petitioner has compiled chart of 15 petitioners giving details of their marks awarded by the Evaluator-1 and Evaluator-2 and difference of marks given by two Evaluators was much more than 15% in large number of 22 questions answered by the candidates. The petitioners have been declared fail by this method of evaluation and going by the existing Rule 4 of Notification vide Annexure-E dated 15.6.2012, the evaluation was referred to two Evaluators, on the basis of difference of total marks of two Evaluators being more than 15% and the average of best of two Evaluation marks was adopted for declaration of the results.
Some of petitioners have contended before the Court that if best marks of two Evaluators for each question wise Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 4/12 was taken into consideration while interpreting words "best of two out of three evaluation marks", the average of two best evaluation of each question is to be taken into account.
This interpretation canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner requires a more detailed consideration by this Court for taking a final decision in the case.
The respondent - RGUHS is already said to be presently engaged in taking fresh policy decision vide their Affidavit dated 24.4.2018 of Dr.M K Ramesh, Vice- Chancellor and Registrar (Evaluation) and the respondent - University expects to take such final decision in the matter after final decision of the Syndicate in the month of July/August, 2018.
The examination in the present case of these students of MBBS has already taken place in November, 2017 to February, 2018, but the fresh policy decision may not be applied with these Examinations retrospectively unless the respondent - University specifically decides to apply the same retrospectively.
Looking to the difference of marks much more than 15% in each question by the two Evaluators and to introduce the element of fairness as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur University - vs- Samir Gupta and others reported in (1983) 4 SCC 309 in para-15, this Court is of the opinion and as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent - University can be directed to undertake the fresh Evaluation of the petitioners, who have been declared `fail' in the said examination, on the basis of aforesaid evaluation process in terms of existing Rule 4 and therefore by this interim order it is directed as under:
Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 5/12 I) A Model Answer Key be prepared by Committee of Experts appointed by the RGUHS immediately; II) Revaluation by an independent Evaluator of these candidates on the basis of such new Model Key Answers be undertaken immediately thereafter. III) The petitioners have undertaken to bear the cost of such re-valuation process and preparation of Model Key Answers, because the said special arrangement is being specially arranged for them only;
IV) The petitioners 15 in Number only are covered by the aforesaid direction and initially they are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- each with the respondent - University within a period of three days from today; V) The respondent - University is directed to undertake the aforesaid exercise for preparation of model key answers for the aforesaid examination and re-evaluation by independent Evaluator on the basis of said Model Key Answer within a period of four weeks from today to complete the process including the declaration of their result upon fresh evaluation within a period of four weeks from today;
The report of the said compliance shall be made to the Court on the next date of hearing.
List on 28th May, 2018.
This interim order will not be treated as precedent for any other case and this is limited to present 15 petitioners.
The interim order passed by the co-ordinate Bench in some matters allowing the petitioners to continue their studies in the next year concerned, will also continue subject to the result of the writ petitions."
3. Mr.N.K.Ramesh, learned counsel for the Respondents-Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences for Karnataka (RGUHS), submits that the University has undertaken the re-evaluation exercise in pursuance of the directions given by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2018. Though RGUHS had filed a W.A.Nos.1327-1341/2018 (Rajiv Gandhi University & Others -vs- Miss.Nishchitha H. & Others) against the said order, but the Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 02.05.2018 did not interfere with the said interim order passed by this Court on 26.04.2018 and directed the Respondents- University to proceed with the re-evaluation of all the papers as directed in the interim order dated 26.04.2018 but not to declare the results of the same. Thereafter, the Respondents-University after completing the said process in pursuance of the order dated 26.04.2018 has prepared a new Model Key Answer by the experts and has undertaken the process of fresh evaluation of the examination papers of the petitioners in those cases where order was passed on 26.04.2018. On the basis of the said Model Key Answer, out of 15 petitioners in the order dated 26.04.2018 in W.P.No.58414/2017 and connected with matters along with W.P.No.129/2018, W.P.No.119/2018, W.P.No.1597/2018 and W.P.No.1598/2018 mentioned in the cause title, eight students have been declared "pass" on account of such fresh re-
Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 7/12 evaluation in accordance with the new Model Key Answer and the seven students have failed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners- students, at the Bar, also submitted that the award of grace marks as per the Rules wherever applicable, if added in the final Marks Sheet will further result in two more students besides eight students declared pass will also pass and accordingly 10 out of 15 petitioners will stand to be benefited by the effect of the order dated 26.04.2018.
5. Today, a few more connected writ petitions are on Board of the Court namely W.P.No.12287/2018 (filed on 19.03.2018) , W.P.No.19774/2018 (filed on 03.05.2018), W.P.No.58283/2017 (filed on 21.12.2017) and W.P.No.10795/2018 (filed on 07.03.2018). In these cases, the interim order dated 26.04.2018 was not passed. Except these writ petitions, all other writ petitions are on the Board of the Court today were filed prior to 26.04.2018 or just after that date, when the said order dated 26.04.2018 was passed. The case of those petitioners also stand on the same or similar footings. The learned counsels appearing for those petitioners therefore pray that the benefit ensuing and flowing to those petitioners in those cases in which order dated 26.04.2018 was passed by this Court, also deserves to be extended to other similarly situated petitioners.
6. In one of writ petitions namely W.P.Nos.774-775/2018, Mr.D.R.Ravishankar, learned counsel for the petitioners-students also pointed out that even though the re-evaluation process are same for QP Code No.1077 (Physiology Paper-I) and QP Code No.1078 (Physiology Paper-II) and the re-evaluation fees was also paid by the petitioners for both the papers but the re-evaluation process was only carried out in one paper i.e., Physiology Paper-I. Therefore, for the second subject of the same paper may be re-evaluated as per the Model Key Answer, which is now available with the Respondents-University, as prepared in pursuance of the order dated 26.04.2018 such re-evaluation also be directed to be carried out by the Respondents- University.
7. Mr.N.K.Ramesh, the learned counsel for the Respondents-University has made a submission opposing the said prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners-students that the effect of the order dated 26.04.2018 was restricted only to the 15 petitioners in whose cases the said order was passed by this Court.
8. Batch of these cases raise a very piquant situation before this Court. Though the order dated 26.04.2018 was passed and the effect of the same was restricted to the 15 petitioners as noted in Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 9/12 the said order dated 26.04.2018 itself, this Court today is faced with the situation, where other writ petitions though filed before 26.04.2018 or filed just after that on 03.05.2018 (W.P.No.19774/2018) but since those petitioners-students are similarly situated, this Court would not like to deprive those petitioners- students also of the same benefit which flows from the order dated 26.04.2018 to those 15 petitioners merely because a similar order was not passed in those cases, as they were not listed before the Court on that day.
9. This Court, has already recorded in the order dated 26.04.2018 itself that the said order will not be treated as precedent for any other case. With the same rider, therefore, the benefit ensuing from the order dated 26.04.2018 deserves to be extended at least to the writ petitioners who are before this Court as of today and re-evaluation has to be undertaken by the Respondents-University in terms of the order dated 26.04.2018 for these petitioners also. A direction is therefore now issued to the Respondents- University to undertake such exercise and complete the same within a period of 15 days on payment of requisite fees by the petitioners-students within six days from today.
10. The petitioners-students, who pass on account of this additional re-evaluation exercise in pursuance of the order dated 26.04.2018 only will be entitled to get consequential benefit in the progress of Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 10/12 their course of M.B.B.S. In the present cases, those petitioners-students, who unfortunately failed even despite such additional re-evaluation exercise in pursuance of the order dated 26.04.2018 have to reconcile to their fate and accordingly, they will not be entitled to any relief in the matter.
11. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Respondents- University to undertake a similar re-evaluation exercise as undertaken by them in respect of 15 students for the other petitioners-students also, whose writ petitions are already filed and listed today before this Court.
12. It is made clear that no relief on the basis of the order dated 26.04.2018 will be extendable to any other students, who approach the Court and file such writ petitions hereafter because further orders on similar lines at a belated stage is going to cause prejudice and administrative and other educational complications in the case of such petitioners-students as well as the Respondents- University.
13. It is also made clear that this order passed in aforesaid unusual circumstances, will not form any precedent for the cases of this nature and the same also will not affect the modification or taking of the new policy decision by the Respondents-
Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 11/12 University in this regard for which the Respondents- University had earlier submitted that they are in the process of finalizing.
14. The consequential Marks Sheet of the result declared in pursuance of this order will be issued to the petitioners-students as early as possible not later than one month from the declaration of the result.
15. The Respondents-University is directed to undertake re-evaluation of the Physiology Paper- II (QP Code No.1078) of the petitioners-students in W.P.No.774-775/18 also and declare the result accordingly.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petitions are disposed of."
3. Though the learned Counsel for the Respondent-University, Mr.N.K.Ramesh has opposed the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of aforesaid order to the present Petitioner-Student also, in view of the fact that the representation of the Date of Order:08.06.2018 W.P.No.24842/2018 Yejurva S Patil Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences 12/12 petitioner for this purpose was rejected by the Respondent-University on 25.4.2016, but the writ petitions came to be disposed of in terms of this Court's interim order dated 26.4.2018. The Respondent -
University has given effect to the interim order dated 26.4.2018 in the case of such other similarly situated students. Therefore, the same order deserves to be passed in this petition also.
Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is also disposed of in the same terms. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE nv