Petitioner challenged nil marks and undervaluation in an MBBS Anatomy exam, seeking answer script revaluation. Court held no academic provision existed for revaluation and student assessment is irrelevant, dismissing the writ petition.
No order as to costs.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO :13521 of 2006
Dated 18th July, 2006
Between
Mohd. Ziauddin Sheeraz …Petitioner
And
NTR University of Helath Sciences, AP, Hyderabad and anr.
….Respondents.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 13521 of 2006
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in awarding nil marks to certain questions, and, undervaluing certain answers given by the petitioner in the subject of Anatomy in the First Year MBBS Examination held in April, 2006, as illegal and arbitrary and for consequential direction to call for the answer scripts and send the same to an expert for revaluation.
It is the case of the petitioner that though he has answered certain questions very well even in the subject of Anatomy, but
however, without any valid reason, no marks have been awarded to some of the answers.
The petitioner appeared for the MBBS First year examination held in April, 2006. The minimum marks to be secured in each subject are 60. The petitioner secured 72 marks out of 120 in the subject of Bio-Chemistry, 61 marks out of 120 in the subject of Physiology, but however, in the subject of Anatomy, he secured only 51 marks out of 120 and as such, he was declared fail in the said subject.
When the matter has come up on earlier occasion, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents took time to get instructions. To day, when the matter is called, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the answers scripts of the petitioner were verified and found to be correct and he was not qualified having regard to marks secured by him in the subject of Anatomy.
Except his own assessment with regard to the correctness of the answers, there is no other basis for filing this Writ petition. Students’ assessment with regard to correctness of answer is not relevant factor for award of marks. It is ultimately for the examiner to value the paper and award marks. Further, it is also brought to my notice that there is no provision in the academic regulations for revaluation of the answer scripts. It is fairly well settled that in absence of any provision for revaluation in the academic regulations, merely because student did not get marks as per his/her assessment is no ground either to order for revaluation or to call for the answer scrip by this court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In that view of the matter, I do not find any valid ground for grant of relief as prayed for.
The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
----------------------------------JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
DATE: 18-07-2006. Msnr.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether absence of a provision for revaluation in academic regulations precludes granting relief under Article 226 for alleged unfair assessment.
Whether a student's own assessment of answer correctness is a relevant factor for awarding marks.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohd. Ziauddin Sheeraz
NTR University of Helath Sciences, AP, Hyderabad
R. SUBHASH REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
