Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sanjeev A R vs Bangalore University on 1 October, 2012

Author: Ram Mohan Reddy

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

                            1
                                              W.P.37942/12

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

          DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF OCTOBER 2012

                         BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY

        WRIT PETITION No.37942 OF 2012 (EDN-EX)

BETWEEN :

SANJEEV A R
S/O SRI RANGASWAMY A R
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NO. 2792, 16TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN,
BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560070.
                                            ...PETITIONER

( By Sri. PUNDIKAI ISHWARA BHAT, ADVOCATE )

AND :

1       BANGALORE UNIVERSITY
        REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
        (EVALUATION)
        CENTRAL COLLEGE CAMPUS
        BANGALORE-560001

2       SURANA COLLEGE
        NO.6, SOUTH END ROAD
        BANGALORE-560004
        REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

( By Sri. N K RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 )

    THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
                               2
                                                  W.P.37942/12

DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REVALUE THE COMPUTER
GRAPHICS PAPER & SYSTEMS PROGRAMMING PAPERS OF
THE PETITIONER & DECLARE HIM AS PASS; AND ETC.

     THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRL.HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                        ORDER

Petitioner, a student of the bachelors degree in Computer Application in Surana College affiliated to the Bangalore University appeared for the examinations of 6th Semester conducted by the Bangalore University in the month of May 2012 and was declared 'fail' in 3 theory subjects namely Design & Analysis of Algorithms, Computer Graphics and Systems Programming, having secured 20, 11 and 16 marks respectively. Petitioner applied for revaluation in Design & Analysis of Algorithms and Systems Programming, whence it revealed that the petitioner was entitled to 35 marks in the answer script of former subject, while no additional marks in the latter subject. In other words, petitioner was declared 'pass' in Design & Analysis of Algorithms and 'fail' in the other two subjects. Petitioner's application for revaluation of the 3 W.P.37942/12 theory answer script in Computer Graphics, was rejected for not having secured the minimum of 15 marks. Hence this petition for a direction to revalue the theory papers in Computer Graphics and Systems Programming and declare him as having passed.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterates the averments made out in the memorandum of petition.

3. Sri.N.K.Ramesh, learned Counsel for respondent

- Bangalore University points to the notification dt. 20/5/2011, more appropriately to Clause-4 to submit that the petitioner having not secured the minimum of 15% of marks in the theory paper of Computer Graphics is disentitled to a revaluation of that answer script. Learned Counsel further submits that the question of a second revaluation of the theory answer script of Systems Programming, does not arise since in a revaluation, 16 marks that was obtained by the petitioner remained without any additional marks. According to the learned 4 W.P.37942/12 Counsel, a revaluation would arise if there is a difference of more than 15% marks between the first valuation and the revaluation, in accordance with Clause-7 of the notification.

4. Petitioner is disentitled to a revaluation of the theory paper in Computer Graphics as he has obtained only 11 marks and for a further revaluation of Systems Programming theory answer script, since the 16 marks obtained in the first valuation remains the same in the revaluation, having regard to Clause-4 and Clause-7 which reads thus:

(4) Candidates who have secured 15% of maximum marks or more in each paper are eligible to apply for Re-Valuation by paying prescribed fee.
(5) x x x (6) x x x (7) In case of Re-valuation, if there is difference of more than 15% marks between the first valuation and re-valuation, the said script shall be referred to third valuer, who 5 W.P.37942/12 has not valued the scripts earlier and the marks awarded by the third valuer shall be final. However, the candidate is entitled to the marks advantageous to him/her.

Petition is accordingly rejected.

SD/-

JUDGE rd/-