Dismissed¶37

Ananya. K v. the Registrar Evaluation

Karnataka HC25 Jun 2026WP/18346/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RGUHS MBBS revaluation refused; no provision for revaluation; Division Bench W.A.No.1372/2025 followed; writ petition dismissed; Articles 226 & 227 Constitution r/w S.151 CPC; petitioner Ananya K (Arvind N.); respondent Registrar Evaluation, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (Mamatha Kulkarni); Judge Ashok S. Kinagi; NC: 2026:KHC:31941; decided 25-06-2026.

What did the court decide?

This Court decided that the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by the Division Bench order in W.A.No.1372/2025 and connected matters, which held that there is no provision for revaluation. ¶32

Ananya. K Vs the Registrar Evaluation — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:31941 WP No. 18346 of 2026

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 18346 OF 2026 (EDN-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

ANANYA. K, D/O KUMARASWAMY Y., AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT LAKSHMI NIVASA, NAGAPPA LAYOUT, GORAVINAKAALU RASTE, HOSADURGA - 577 527.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. ARVIND N., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE REGISTRAR EVALUATION, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, 4^TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT.MAMATHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO CONSIDER THE

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:31941 WP No. 18346 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

REPRESENTATION DATED 14/05/2026 ANNEXURE - A AND SEND THE PETITIONER ANSWER SCRIPTS TO THE ONE MORE VALUATOR FOR THE REVALUATION AND ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS BY CONSIDERING THE BEST MARKS AS AWARDED BY THE EXAMINERS AND ETC.,

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking the

¶23

following prayer:

¶24

A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondent university to consider the representation dated 14/05/2026 (Annexure-A) and send the petitioner answer scripts to the one more valuator for the revaluation and announce the results by considering the best marks as awarded by the examiners.

¶25

B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondent No 1 university to direct the respondent university

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:31941 WP No. 18346 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

to henceforth provide the key answers, key words, key phrases/terms, to the examiners for evaluating all the question papers set by it for all the MBBS Examinations conducted by the Respondent Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences.

¶29

C. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to the respondent to provide an opportunity to appear and write in the upcoming examination scheduled in the month Oct-Nov 2026.

¶30

D. Pass such other orders/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem it fit and proper considering the facts & Circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶31

2. The issue involved in this case is squarely

¶32

covered by the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1372/2025 and connected matters. The Division Bench has held that there is no provision for revaluation. The present petitioner in the present writ petition seeking for revaluation. As the Division Bench has

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:31941 WP No. 18346 of 2026

¶34

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

already dismissed similar identical matters, in view of the same, nothing survives for consideration. I do not find any merit in the case, accordingly, the writ petition is

¶37

dismissed .

¶38

Pending IA(s), if any, stands disposed of

¶39

accordingly.

¶40

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶41

SKS

Ananya. K v. the Registrar Evaluation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ananya. K v. the Registrar Evaluation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Shanthala K Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Puttaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Lijo Louis Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Chikka Narayanappa Vs Sri Chikka Chinnappa @ Chinnappa

K Mahadevaiah Vs the Board of Directors/Competent Authority

G C Ananda Vs Director (a and Hr) Kptcl