Madhya Pradesh High Court
Krishan Kant Agnihotri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 June, 2014
1
W.P.8438/2014
Writ Petition No.8438/2014
18.06.2014
Shri Praveen Verma, learned counsel for petitioner. Heard on admission.
Being unsuccessful in getting selected to the post of Post Graduate Teacher on deputation taken recourse to vide advertisement dated 07.01.2014 as the marks obtained by the petitioner in post graduate subject fell short of 0.5%, the petitioner vide this petition seeks mandamus that by rounding of 59.5% marks be treated as 60%.
Evident it is from the advertisement that incumbent it is for the candidate to have 60% in post graduate ¿ lacaf/kr fo"k; esa 60 izfr'kr ;k vf/kd vadksa ds lkFk LukRdksRrj ,oa ch-,M- ¼60 izfr'kr izkIrkadksa ds lkFk vfuok;Zr% mRrh.kZ½ vaxzsth ,oa fgUnh Hkk"kk esa i<+kusa dh n{krk gksuk vfuok;Z gS**À Petitioner fails to commend to any rule as would entitle him for a rounding off.
In Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore vs. Hemlatha (2012) 8 SCC 568, it has been observed in respect of rounding up of marks -
"10. After considering the Orissa Rules, this Court in Rupashree Chowdhary case (2011) 8 SCC 108 held that Rule 24 thereof made it clear that -
"in order to qualify in the written examination a candidate has to obtain a minimum of 33% marks 2 W.P.8438/2014 in each of the papers and not less than 45% marks in the aggregate in all the written papers in the main examination".
This Court observed that when emphasis is given in the Rule itself to the minimum marks to be obtained, there can be no relaxation or rounding-off. It was observed that no power was provided in the statute/ Rules permitting any such rounding-off or giving grace marks. It was clarified that -
"10.... The Orissa Rules are statutory in nature and no dilution or amendment to such rules is permissible or possible by adding some words to the said statutory rules for giving the benefit of rounding-off or relaxation."
In view whereof, since no relief can be granted, petition fails and is dismissed in limine. No costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) (JUDGE) anand