Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. For deciding the above noted questions, we have culled out the facts from the pleadings of the parties and the files and records produced by Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, Standing Counsel for the University.

3.The respondents joined 1st year of MBBS course in 2006-07 in different private medical colleges affiliated to the University. They appeared in the examination held from 5th September to 10th October, 2006 in the subjects of Physiology, Anatomy and Bio-Chemistry (two papers each). The result of the examination was declared on 02.12.2006. Out of 4076 candidates, who appeared in the examination, 992 were declared "fail" in different papers. A substantially large number (436) of them applied for re-totalling for which provision has been made by Resolution No. XXII passed by the Executive Council of the University in its meeting held on 11.1.1989. The process of re-totalling was undertaken from 29.1.2007 to 31.1.2007. At that stage, some representations were submitted to the University on behalf of the students in the name of M.B.B.S. 1st year Students Parents Association with the complaint of improper valuation and undervaluation of the answer scripts. Similar representations were made to the Chancellor of the University, the Chief Minister and the Minister for Medical, Health and Family Welfare. The same were forwarded to University. Some of the failed students also met the Registrar and made request for revaluation. On 3.1.2007, the University constituted a committee comprising of Prof. Honeyman, Head of the Department of Anatomy, Kurnool Medical College, Dr. Malleswari, Professor and Head of the Department of Physiology, Guntur Medical College, Gunturand Dr. K.L. PrabhakarReddy, Professor and Head of the Department of Bio-Chemistry, Siddartha Medical College, Vijayawada for re-verification of the answer scripts. Subsequently, Dr. G.S.R. Sharma, M.D., Professor and Head of the Department of Physiology, Guntur Medical College was nominated to the committee because Dr. Malleswari expressed her inability to attend the work. The members of the committee attended the University and undertook the so-called re-verification, which has also been described in the records of the University as re-examination of the answer scripts and recorded marks on printed slips of papers, which were stapled at the top of the answer scripts. According to the writ petitioners, the process of re-verification/re-examination took about ten days, but the note sheets made available by the learned Counsel for the University and affidavits filed on its behalf contain different versions of the actual days during which the process of the so-called re-verification was undertaken. The note recorded by Superintendent, Assistant Registrar (Examination) and Registrar on 31.1.2007, which also bear the signatures of the Vice-Chancellor with the date as 1/2, reveal that the committee attended the University on 13th and 14th January, 2007 and completed the re-examination of answer scripts and returned the same. However, in the affidavits filed on behalf of the University by Sri G.V. Sankara Rao, Legal Officer in Writ Petition No. 2925 of 2007 P.N. Swathi Lavanya and Ors. v. Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, and batch, as also in the affidavit filed by Sri A. N. Murthy, Joint Registrar (Examination) in Writ Petition No. 8819 of 2007, the dates of re-examination have been mentioned as 17th and 18th January, 2007. Some answer ocripts, which were left out from the process of re-verification/re-examination, were sent to one or the other member of the committee, who is said to have again undertaken that exercise and returned the same to the University. On 2.2.2007, the University declared the revised result and, thereby, 294 of the students, who applied for re-totalling, were declared "pass".

7. The above decision of the Executive Council was challenged by the students in Writ Petition Nos. 2926, 2986, 2997, 3017, 3056, 3135, 3136, 3151, 3161, 3213, 3237, 3303, 3625 and 2767 of 2007. Some of the students, who did not apply for re-totalling, also filed Writ Petition Nos. 4053, 4113, 4954 and 4968 of 2007 for issue of a direction to the University to undertake re-verification/re-examination of their answer scripts as well. One writ petition i.e. W.P. No. 6897 of 2007 was filed for cancellation of the entire process of re-verification/re-examination.

13. Shri C.V. Mohan Reddy, learned Advocate General appearing for the appellants argued that in terms of Section 12(2) of the Act, the Vice-Chancellor can exercise general supervision and control over the affairs of the University and give effect to the decision of other authorities of the University, but he cannot take decision or pass an order in derogation of the statutory provisions. Learned Advocate General pointed out that the Act and the statutes framed thereunder do not contain any provision for re-verification or re-examination of the answer scripts of any examination and argued that in the purported exercise of his power of general supervision and control over the affairs of the University, the Vice-Chancellor could not have passed an order for re-verification, which ultimately turned out to be an exercise for revaluation. He then submitted that even in exercise of emergency power under Section 12(3) of the Act, the Vice-Chancellor cannot order or facilitate re-valuation of the answer scripts. Learned Advocate General emphasised that the entire exercise undertaken for the so-called re-examination/re-valuation was contrary to the scheme of the Act, and argued that this left the Executive Council with no option but to cancel the revised result. Learned Advocate General referred to Statute 4 of the University Statutes, Section 19 of the Act and para 5 of the Statutes and argued that in its capacity as principal executive body of the University, the Executive Council has the powers to rescind the decision of the Vice-Chancellor and the learned Single Judge committed a serious error by nullifying resolutions dated 10.2.2007 and 2.4.2007.

9. As per the above orders, the answer scripts of the students of all three subjects were handed over to the Members of the above committee on 13.1.2007. The committee attended the NTRUHS on 13,n and 14,h Jan 2007 and completed the re-examination of the answer scripts and returned the same.

10. It may be seen that as a result of reexamination, there are some changes in the marks awarded and change in the result also in case of some students.

11. In view of the above, file is submitted for further directions/orders in the matter please.