Allowed

Twinkle Sahoo v. Sri. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2023WP/609/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A student petitioned for a writ of mandamus directing a dental college to accept fees for re-totaling her failed exam answer sheets. The University initially refused, citing lack of fee, but the court directed the University to consider the petitioner's representation under relevant rules if the facility exists.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus directed respondent college to accept fees for re-totaling; respondent university directed to consider petitioner's representation regarding re-totaling.

Twinkle Sahoo Vs Sri. Rajiv Gandhi University of… — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.609 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

TWINKLE SAHOO D/O JAYAKRISHNA SAHOO AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT NO.301, 3^RD FLOOR NAKSHATRA AMOG APARTMENT PLOT NO.7 & 8, MARIA STREET 1^ST STREET, MARIYANNAPALYA BENGALURU – 560 024

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI VIKAS M., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES KARNATAKA, 4^TH “T” BLOCK JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 041 REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR

¶12

¶13

SRI RAJIV GANDHI COLLEGE OF DENTAL SCIENCES BENGALURU, 3^RD CROSS ROAD POST, CHOLA NAGAR R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 032 REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL

¶14

... RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI M.S.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-1)

¶16

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.12.2022 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RECEIVE PRESCRIBED FEE FOR RETOTALLING OF ANSWER SHEET OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN FOR THE EXAM PAPER. ‘GENERAL HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, NUTRITION & DIETICS, PAPER CODE A 01” AND “ DENTAL ANATOMY , EMBRALOGY & ORAL HISTOLOGY, PAPER CODE A03” OF BDS FIRST YEAR EXAMINATION, 2022, WHOSE RESULT WAS DECLARED ON 27.12.2022 AND PASS AN ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW & ETC.

¶18

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as

¶22

learned counsel for respondent No.1.

¶23

Notice to respondent No.2 as sought by hand summons is received by respondent No.2.

¶24

Petitioner was admitted to BDS Course in respondent No.2 – Sri Rajiv Gandhi College of Dental Sciences, Bangalore and got enrolled for the academic year 2021-22 batch. It is submitted that she appeared for the BDS First year examination, 2022, for which she had been issued with Hall Ticket.

¶25

After examination was conducted as per the

¶26

time and schedule of the Hall ticket, result of the exam was announced on 27.12.2022, which was published and she came to know that she has secured 342 marks out of 600 marks. She realised that she had failed in General Human Physiology and Biochemistry, Nutrition and Dietics, Paper Code A01 and Dental Anatomy,

¶27

¶28

Embryology & Oral Histology, Paper Code A03 of BDS I year Examination, 2022.

¶29

It is the case of the petitioner that if a

¶30

student failed in any one subject he can be given grace marks of 5 marks to be added to the subject in which the student has failed. The petitioner submits she require only four marks and one mark respectively in each subjects as aforestated. Hence, she approached the respondent No.2 – College seeking re-totaling of the exam paper answer sheet, in which she has failed. She was informed by the respondent No.2 – College that they have not received any direction from the University for taking fee for application for re-totaling of exam paper answer sheet.

¶31

Thereafter, the petitioner approached

¶32

respondent No.1 – University, in turn they asked her to approach the College. She was made to run pillar to post and hence, left without any other remedy she has approached this Court.

¶33

¶34

Learned counsel for petitioner brings to the

¶35

attention of this Court to the Web Site Portal of the respondent No.1 - University vide Annexure-E, wherein to a question ‘Is there a provision for re-totaling?’ the answer provided is ‘Yes student has an option of applying for Re-totaling of marks within 10 days after announcement of results by paying prescribed fee through Web Portal of college only’.

¶36

Petitioner further contends that when such provision in the University Web Site she should be permitted to pay necessary fee for re-totaling and retotaling requires to be done as sought for by the petitioner.

¶37

Learned counsel representing respondent No.1 – University vehemently objects to such arguments putforth by the petitioner on the ground that there is no such provision for re-totaling and it runs contrary to document at Annexure-E.

¶38

However, this petition is filed seeking mandamus to consider the representation dated

¶39

¶40

28.12.2022 made by the petitioner seeking for revaluation / re-totaling of DADH paper. Admittedly, there is no scope for re-valuation of the paper or there may be provision for re-totaling as submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-E, which is contraverted by the respondent No.1 – University. Accordingly, I pass the following order:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(1) The instant writ petition is allowed.;

¶43

(2) A writ of mandamus is issued directing

¶44

the respondent No.2 – College to accept the fee for re-totaling the answer sheet of the petitioner for exam paper ‘General Human Physiology & Biochemistry, Nutrition & Dietics, Paper Cone A01’ and

¶45

‘Dental Anatomy, Embryology & Oral Histology, Paper Code A03’ of BDS First year Examination, 2022, if such provision is available in the Rules and Regulations of the respondent No.1 – University.;

¶46

¶47

(3) The respondent No.1 – University is directed to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 28.12.2022 in accordance with law and by following relevant Rules and Regulations of the respondent No.1 – University.;

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

Twinkle Sahoo v. Sri. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Twinkle Sahoo v. Sri. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaduranga Kanthraj Urs Vs Yaduveer Gopal Raj Urs @ Yaduveer

Sri. Shivaram Mally Vs Sri. Ramakrishna P B

Sri.S.Muniyappa Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Nagaraja Rao C H Vs Arun Kumar a D

Smt. Sushmitha Patil Vs Sri Manjunagouda Patil

Smt Sowmya Vs Mr Prashanth Mayya C S