Writ petition challenging validity of University of Pune revaluation ruledismissed. Court held petitioner had prior remedy via Division Bench judgment,making matter not res-integra. Petition rejected summarily.
Petition rejected summarily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
srp.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6700 OF 2007.
Dr. Nitin Mehkarkar.
..Petitioner.
V E R S U S
University of Pune, Pune. ..Respondents.
Ms. P. V. Thorat i/b Mr. V. M. Thorat for the petitioner.
Mrs.M.G.Kulkarni for the respondents.
CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.G.KARNIK,JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 22, 2007.
P.C.
| 1. | By | this | petitio | n the petiti | oner challeng | es | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| the | validity | of | rul | e | of | the | University | regarding | the |
| revaluati | on of |
the | ma | rks | to | the | effect | that the |
change |
| in | marks | on | rev | aluati | on | shall | not | be taken |
into |
| consider | ation | unless | on | re | valuation | the | marks | exceed | |
| by | 10% or |
m |
ore | of | the | maximu | m marks |
of the |
theory |
| papers. | The | petit | ioner | al | so se |
eks a |
direction | to the |
University to declare the revaluation results of the
petitioner.
| 2. | Petit | ioner | appeared | for | the M.D. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Pediatric) | examination | in | May | 2007. | The result |
of | |
| which | wee | declared | on | 29.6.2007. | The | petitioner |
failed in the said examination. The petitioner
applied for the revaluation of the marks.
:2:
| folds. | The | first grievan |
ce of |
the |
petitio | ner | is | that |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| the re |
sult of |
the revaluation |
has | not | been | decl | ared | by |
| the | University. | However, | during | the | pendency | of | the | |
| petition, | the | result of |
the | revaluati | on | have | been | |
| declared | by | the respond |
ent | no.1 | - |
Uni | versity. |
Therefore, the first grievance of the petitioner does not survive.
| 4. | As r | egards | the | second | grievance | of the | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| petitioner | that | the | rul | e | of | the | Univ | ersity | which |
| provides | that | unless | the | marks | obta | ined |
on | revaluation | |
| exceed | by 10% |
of the |
ma | xim | um | marks | of the |
theor | y paper |
| the | old ma |
rks wo |
uld | not | be |
altered | is | invalid | and |
| therefore | a | direction | may | be | issued | to | the | University | |
| to t |
ake the |
marks |
obtain | ed i |
n rev |
aluation | into | ||
| considerati | on even |
if they |
do |
not | exceed | by | 10% | of the |
|
| maximum | marks, | we | noti | ce | th | at the |
matter | is |
not |
| res-integra. | It is |
cove | red | by |
a |
decision | of | Division | |
| Bench | rendered | in | Yudh | vir | Singh | v/s. | Babasaheb | ||
| Ambedkar | M | arathwada | Uni | vers | ity | and | others | report | ed in |
| 1998(2) | Bom. | C.R. | 435. | In | view | of the |
said | decision |
the second grievance of the petitioner also does not
survive. Petition is rejected summarily.
(D.G.KARNIK, J.)
(S.B.MHASE, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner could challenge the validity of the University's rule on mark revaluation through a writ petition.
Whether the matter was res-integra given the existence of a prior Division Bench decision.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Yudhvir Singh v. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada UniversityReferred¶14
Yudhvir Singh v/s. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University and others reported in 1998(2) Bom. C.R. 435 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dr. Nitin Mehkarkar
University of Pune
S.B.Mhase
D.G.Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
