Karnataka High Court
Dr. Guruprasad vs Rajiv Gandhi University on 20 October, 2020
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.11348 OF 2020 (EDN - RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. GURUPRASAD,
S/O CHENNIGA RAMAIAH,
AGE 34 YEARS,
C/O NO.340, 7TH MAIN ROAD,
80 FEET ROAD, ITI LAYOUT,
MALLATHAHALLI,
BANGALORE SOUTH,
BANGALORE - 560 057.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT.SUMANA BALIGA M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE,
4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560 041.
REPRESENTED BY
REGISTRAR EVALUATION.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE
THE PETITIONERS PASS IN THE EXAMINATION IN THE
DISCIPLINE OF MD PATHOLOGY EXAMINATION CONDUCTED BY
THE RAGIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES AND
ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
Petitioner, a Post Graduate medical student having been failed by a fraction of percentage (49.75% qua 50%), is knocking at the doors of Writ Court grieving against the respondent-Health University inter alia contending that by virtue of Ordinance Governing Post Graduate, including PG- Diploma & Super Speciality Answer Scripts Evaluation promulgated by Notification dated 29.03.2019, the said fraction ought to have been rounded off to the next full figure, arguably which would have resulted into his passing.
2. Respondent-Health University having entered appearance through it's Senior Panel Counsel, opposes the writ petition contending that the petitioner is not entitled to the 'argued rounding off'; it is also submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to take the benefit of judgment in W.P.58414/2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure-H.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioner as under for the following reasons:
3
(a) the Digital Valuation Slips of the petitioner at Annexure-C series show that the five evaluators were not provided with key answers and therefore in terms of the judgment in the case of Ms.Nischitha vs. RGUHS in W.P.No.58414/2017 decided on 06.06.2018, there is infirmity in the valuation process; the contention that the said judgment shall not be treated as a precedent even if accepted would not come to the rescue of the respondent-University since parity factors if not the precedent; however, at this length of time it is not worthwhile to subject the theory papers for valuation afresh and some equitable relief needs to be granted, instead; and,
(b) as per the extant norms of the respondent-
University for passing in the examination a student has to secure 50% in the theory papers in aggregate and 50% in the practical + viva voce; petitioner has secured 49.75% in the theory papers and 70% in the practical + viva voce; paragraph 5(I)(b) of the subject Ordinance reads "the average of the best four total marks for the paper awarded by five evaluators, which is rounded off to the nearest value, shall be considered for final computation of the results"; since arithmethically 4 petitioner has secured 49.75%, the said figure has to be rounded off to the next whole and that will be 50%.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; the petitioner's marks in theory examination at 49.75% stands rounded off to the next whole ie., 50% and consequently the respondent-University shall declare him 'passed' and to issue the necessary result sheet accordingly. Time for compliance is four weeks.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE NS