Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankur Sharma vs The Madhya Pradesh Medical Science ... on 7 September, 2022
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Ravi Malimath, Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 7th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 7654 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. ANKUR SHARMA S/O SHRI SURENDRA SHARMA,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR ROLL NO.2014787,
R/O B BLOCK, GANDHI MEDICAL COLLEGE,
HAMIDIYA, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AKASH KUMAR SINGH S/O SHRI AJAY KUMAR
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR ROLL NO 2215962,
R/O POLICE LINE BAKAWAL DUMARAWN,
DISTRICT-MAU (UTTAR PRADESH)
3. RICHA PANJWANI D/O SHRI DEEPAK
PANJWANI, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR
ROLL NO 2014881, R/O D BLOCK, GANDHI
MEDICAL COLLEGE, HAMIDIYA, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. DEEPIKA CHATURKAR D/O SHRI LAXMICHAND
CHATURKAR, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR
ROLL NO 2409859 R/O BUNDELKHAND MEDICAL
COLLEGE, SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. GWASHALE SEB D/O KUOLEVI SEB, AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT OF
MBBS 1ST YEAR ROLL NO 2014821 R/O D BLOCK,
GANDHI MEDICAL COLLEGE, HAMIDIYA,
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. RITIK AGRAWAL S/O SHRI BIRESH AGRAWAL,
2
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR ROLL NO 2015242
R/O SUBHASH WARD, HATA, DAMOH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
7. DEEPIKA MARKAM D/O SHRI HANSRAJ SINGH
MARKAM, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR
ROLL NO 2015158 R/O 18 DHOOMA DEVRI,
FATEHPUR, HATA, DISTRICT-DAMOH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
8. LOKESH KATARA S/O SHRI CHANDRASHEKHAR
KATARA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR
ROLL NO 2216017 R/O JUNI RAMBHAPUR,
DISTRICT-JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
9. DEV JARWAL S/O SHRI DHARVENDRA JARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR R/O 5 A SUBH
LABH AVENUE KANADIA ROAD, RAM MANDIR,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
10. ANSHUMAN GUPTA S/O SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD
GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT OF MBBS 1ST YEAR ROLL NO 2015140
R/O BALAJI NAGAR NEAR NIMAR HOSPITAL,
BURHANPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI R.K. TIWARI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE MADHYA PRADESH MEDICAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY JABALPUR, THROUGH ITS VICE
CHANCELLOR, M.P. M.S. UNIVERSITY MEDICAL
COLLEGE CAMPUS, JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. THE REGISTRAR (CONTROLLER OF
EXAMINATION) MEDICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY
MEDICAL COLLEGE CAMPUS, JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
3
(BY SHRI SHASHANK PANDEY - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Vishal Mishra passed the following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking the relief for revaluation of their answer sheets and a further direction be issued to revise mark-sheet and promote the petitioners to the next semester.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they have appeared in the 1st year MBBS examination in February 2021 for which the result was declared 27.08.2021 and they were failed in one subject i.e. Anatomy, Physiology & Biochemistry and as per the new guidelines scheme of University Examination 2020-21 adopted by the respondent No.2-University, the candidate must score 50% marks in aggregate in both papers for passing. Thereafter the petitioners applied for retotalling. The authorities have conducted retotalling and informed the petitioners that there is no change. They participated in the compartment examination of the said subjects on November, 2021. The result was declared on January, 2022. Petitioners failed in the examination. On verification of the answer sheets, it was noticed that there was no tick marks or remarks on the evaluated answer paper shown to them. Virtually, there is no marking being done by the evaluator. Therefore, the petitioners are having apprehension that proper marks are not being provided to them and they have been declared failed. The respondent No.2 Controller of Examination without revaluation of the answer sheet of some students, marks have been awarded about 20-30 marks on each subject. The petitioners made an application seeking for revaluation, but the same was not considered. They have made an application for supply of answer sheets for physical verification. Placing reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Board of Secondary Education and another vs. Aditya Bandopadya and others, reported in 2011 (8) SCC 497, they have 4 prayed for the relief of revaluation and for a revised mark sheets along with a direction to the respondents to promote them.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents by filing a return contended that in terms of Section 50 of the Ordinance there can be a verification of answer sheets. There is no rule for revaluation of any answer sheets, only retotalling can be done. The authorities have considered the application of the petitioners for retotalling and no change was found by the authorities. The provisions of post-evaluation of answer books is provided in Section 55 of the Ordinance and a plain reading of the Section 55 makes it clear that it gives power to the Vice Chancellor to carry out the spot-evaluation of answer books of each examination. It is argued that law with respect of revaluation is well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of High Court of Tripura vs. Tirtha Sarathi Mukherjee and others, reported in 2019(2) JLJR 102, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there cannot be any revaluation without there being any rule providing for the same. Further placed reliance in the case of Prem Ratan Agrawal vs. Board of Secondary Education, reported in 2002 (2) MPHT 570, Board of Secondary Education vs. Rajeev Gupta, reported in L.P.A. No.295 of 2001 decided on 26.02.2004. Therefore, he has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
5. From perusal of the record, it is seen that the petitioners have applied for revaluation of their answer sheets. Initially, for retotalling which was being done by the authorities and finding no change, the information was communicated to the petitioners. They have applied for revaluation of the answer sheets. There is no provision in the ordinance which call for revaluation. The provisions for verification have been provided which means recounting and retotalling of marks of all answers but the entire ordinance does not speak of any revaluation. The law with respect to the aforesaid is apparently clear in the case of Prem Ratan Agrawal vs. Board of Secondary Education, reported in 2002 (2) MPHT 5 570 in which the Hon'ble Court has held that as general rule the Court has no power to order for revaluation of the answer sheet since the rule does not provide for revaluation, however, in extra ordinary case where student is bright and when injustice have been done, then in such cases revaluation of marks can be done specially in the case of Mathematics and Science. It is some time open to the Court to have a look at the answer sheet and compared with the model paper and if there are gross discrepancies found in the answer book then it is always open to the Court to re-evaluate the marks. A similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Board of Secondary Education vs. D. Suvankar, reported in (2007) 1 SCC 603.
6. In view of the aforesaid, when the petitioners could not point out any discrepancies and in absence of any rules for revaluation, no relief can be extended to the petitioners.
7. The writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
irfan
Digitally signed by
MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI
Date: 2022.09.13
11:33:35 +05'30'