Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This writ petition is filed 'to declare the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in conducting the digital evaluation process contrary to the principles laid down in 'Dr. P.Kishore Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1'and 'Dr. J.Kiran Kumar & others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh'2 in respect of petitioner's 3rd year MBBS course examinations held in the month of November, 2020 and not furnishing copies of the answer scripts, as illegal and arbitrary.'

2. Case of the petitioner is that, she is prosecuting MBBS course in the NRI Institute of Medical Sciences, Visakhapatnam, a college affiliated to the 2nd respondent-University; she appeared for the 3rd year MBBS course examinations held in the month of November, 2020; as per the scheme of examination, a booklet containing 64 pages will be supplied to each student and the answer scripts will be evaluated by two examiners independently and the marks awarded by the two examiners will be clubbed and average marks will be taken and basing on the same, the results of the students will be declared; the 2nd respondent- University introduced the digitalized evaluation system; in respect of 3rd year, a student has to prosecute three subjects viz., ENT, Ophthalmology and Community Medicine and at the end of the academic year, the 2nd respondent will conduct final examination for the each subject wise and maximum marks for the theory examination is that 50 marks each and out of the same, a student must obtain 50% marks in each subject and aggregate to declare pass; though she has written the 2016(6) ALT 408 2017(6) ALT 213 KVL, J examination well she was declared failed; lot of aberrations took place in the process of evaluation of answer scripts; petitioner has a legitimate doubt about the method of evaluation; the imperfection in the process of digital valuation by the agency in respect of post graduate students was pointed out by this Court in Dr. P. Kishore Kumar's case (supra) and the non compliance of the said direction in Dr.P.Kishore Kumar's case (supra) was pointed out in 'Dr.J. Kiran Kumar' s case (supra); in Dr. Kishore Kumar's case (supra), it was held that when the digital answer scripts were evaluated, stylus marks, tick marks etc. evidencing the application of the mind and award of marks have to be put on the digital paper. This Court in Dr.J.Kiran Kumar's case (supra) pointed out that entering marks in the 'script marks report' is not sufficient and scanned answer sheets should show the evidence of evaluation; questioning the said evaluation, present writ petition is filed.

10. This Court in W.P.No.10376 of 2019, dated 19.09.2019, while relying upon the judgment of this Court in Dr. P. Kishore Kumar's case and Dr. J. Kiran Kumar's case, allowed the Writ petition and directed the respondents therein to once again evaluate the answer scripts. The petitioners therein were also a group of medical students and they filed the Writ Petition to declare the action of the respondents therein in not getting the answer scripts digitally evaluated as per the earlier orders of this Court as illegal and arbitrary and even in the said case the answer KVL, J scripts were produced and they did not contain any marks to show that they have been actually evaluated and in those circumstances it was observed that, despite the said two judgments the examiners have not followed the instructions given by the University and the Court.

12. Learned standing counsel relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sahiti's case (supra), submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in the absence of any rules providing for revaluation, no direction can be issued for revaluation. The said judgment may not apply to the facts of the present case, as the KVL, J petitioner's case is that their papers were not evaluated at all as no marks/remarks are found on the answer sheets. It is an admitted case of the respondents that while evaluating the answer scripts, digital tools like stylus marks, tick marks or 'x' marks, underling, comments etc. are not used at all and there are no traces of evaluation on the papers and marks are not awarded to each answer in the answer sheet. It was observed as follows in the said judgment:

16. This Court in WP No.1956 of 2020 allowed the writ petition in similar circumstances on 03.03.2020 observing as follows:

"In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed directing respondent No.2 to digitally evaluate the answer scripts as per prevalent MCI norms by identifying four fresh examiners; respondent No.2 - University shall give clear and categorical instructions to the new set of examiners to physically put the marks viz. stylus mark, tick mark etc. on the uploaded answer script and the corrected sheet shall be preserved for future review. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order."