Dismissed

P.S.R.Lakshmi Bhuvaneshwari v. The Registrar

Madras HC10 Nov 2017WA/1291/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Appeal dismissed a challenge to the evaluation of a pathology answer paper. The court held that no marks could be awarded for the questioned answers and noted the appellant had cleared the supplementary examination, causing no disadvantage. Consequently, no further relief was granted.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal is dismissed with no costs. No further relief is granted to the appellant.

P.S.R.Lakshmi Bhuvaneshwari Vs The Registrar — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 10.11.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

¶7

Writ Appeal No.1291 of 2017

¶8

P.S.R.Lakshmi Bhuvaneswari Preethi
Daughter of P.Subburaj ..Appellant/Petitioner
Vs
1.The Registrar
Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University
Chennai-600 032
2.The Controller of Examination
Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University
Chennai-600 032
3.Madha Dental College and Hospital
Kundrathur
Chennai-600 050
Rep. By its Dean/Principal ..Respondents/Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed against the order dated 14.09.2017
passed in W.P.No.17562 of 2017.

¶9

WP.No.17562 of 2017:Wirt Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, Directing the respondents to value General Pathology Answer Paper (Sub Code 4206 dated 3.2.2017 541416563 544206 February 2017) of the petitioner viz. 1) ten marks question viz. Define Neoplasia. Discuss the routes of spread of malignant tumours and 2) third 5 mark question viz. Write notes on Blood and Bone marrow picture fo ?Chronic Myeloid Leukaemiz properly and add the requred mars as per the Key Answer

¶10

For Appellant :: Mr.R.Singaravelan, Senior counsel for Mr.R.Jayaprakash

¶11

For Respondents:: Mr.D.Ravichander

¶12

Personal appearance of Ms.Pappathi Professor (DCH)

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Judgment of the Court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.)

¶16

Pursuant to our order dated 30.10.2017, Dr.S.Pappathi MD (Pathology) DCH, Professor of Pathology, Madras Medical College, is present today. She has evaluated the answer paper of the appellant.

¶17

After evaluation of the answer paper of the appellant herein, the Panel evaluator has stated that the answer and diagram shown against the relevant Question, does not warrant awarding any mark. Besides that, she has also expressed her view that the appellant has not been given any negative mark for such wrong answer. The said statement of the Panel Evaluator is recorded.

¶18

The learned counsel appearing for Dr.MGR Medical University has stated that on evaluation of the answer paper of the appellant, at the first evaluation, 7 marks has been given for the said question; in the second evaluation, 8 marks has been been and thereby, it was referred to third evaluation, during the pendency of the writ proceedings, wherein, again 7 marks has been given to the said question.

¶19

It is to be noted that on the above circumstances, this court directed the respondent-University to evaluate once again before this court by a Panel Professor. As per Medical Council Regulation, writing a wrong answer to a question, would be given negative marking, however, in the present case, it has not been done so.

¶20

On the above discussion, it is to be stated that the reevaluation done today by the Panel Professor, would lead us to conclude that no relief could be granted to the appellant herein. Hence, we are of the considered view that in this matter, the appellant cannot seek any further relief. In any event, it is also stated that the appellant herein has appeared for subsequent supplementary examination and she has cleared the paper. In this view of the matter, the appellant had no further disadvantage. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS V)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

nvsri

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

To
1.The Registrar
Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University
Chennai-600 032
2.The Controller of Examination
Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University
Chennai-600 032
3.Madha Dental College and Hospital
Kundrathur
Chennai-600 050
Rep. By its Dean/Principal
+1 cc to M/s.R.Jayaprakash Advocate sr 80207
+1 cc to M/s.D.Ravichander Advocate sr 80669
Writ Appeal No.1291 of 2017
ad(co)
aa11/12/2017

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

P.S.R.Lakshmi Bhuvaneshwari v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.S.R.Lakshmi Bhuvaneshwari v. The Registrar

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

R.Paranthaman, Vs The Joint Registrar of Co-op

The Joint Managing Director Vs the Presiding Officer

Dr.P.Sakthivel, Vs State of Tamilnadu

Union of India, Vs The Registrar

The Assistant Provident Fund Vs M/S Renaissance Rtw Asia (P)

Tmt. E.Manjula, Vs Director of Treasuries &