The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a nursing student who claimed he secured low subject marks due to prejudice by the university Director following a complaint he had made. The Court found the claim unsubstantiated based on the petitioner's good performance in other subjects.
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.
CWP-15534/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ***
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15534/2012 Amit Soni Vs.
The Rajasthan Ayurved University & ors.
DATE OF ORDER : 06/10/2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI ***
Mr.Mahendra Singh Gurjar, for petitioner
The petitioner is a student of Diploma Ayush Nursing and Pharmacy (DAN & P) and his grievance is that he appeared in DAN & P Part-II New Examination-2012 but in one of the subject paper “Mental Health Nursing” he was awarded only 38 marks in practical and 5 marks in practical internal with total 43 marks awarded to him. Counsel submits that all other students secured good marks in practical and his apprehension is that since he made complaint against the Director of the respondent-institute, because of this prejudice, a punitive action detrimental to his interest has been taken against him in awarding less marks in practical examination and that is the reason for which he stood fail in the examination as evident from the marks-sheet (Anx.6).
It is not a case where the petitioner that he was denied permission to appear either in the written or practical examination of the subject paper of DAN & P Part-II New Examination-2012
CWP-15534/2012
and the practical marks awarded to him in the subject paper in question is based on subjective assessment of the internal invigilator/expert but this Court cannot express any opinion as regards the marks secured/awarded in the practical examination. However, the submission made that it is all because he made complaint against the Director of the respondentinstitute, is of no basis for the reason that the petitioner appeared in almost six subjects and other than the subject paper of 'Mental Health Nursing', he secured comparatively good marks in practical as well and if the Director of the respondent-institute has got any personal prejudice with the petitioner or biased against him, he could not have secured better marks in practical examination of other subjects in DAN & P Part-II New Examination-2012 as reveals from the marks sheet (Anx.6). Taking note thereof, this Court finds no substance in the instant writ petition.
Consequently, the writ petition stands
dismissed.
[AJAY RASTOGI],J.
Certificate: -All corrections have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed/Raghu,PAJW
Raghu/p.2 /15534-CW-2012-Final.doc
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's low practical marks in 'Mental Health Nursing' were due to prejudice after his complaint against the Director.
Whether the subjective assessment of practical marks by an invigilator should be interfered with in a writ petition.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to succeed in his complaint about biased mark-allotment.
Amit Soni
The Rajasthan Ayurved University
Ajay Rastogi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
