Disposed

Dr. D. Vishnu Kumar (H.T.No. 17111003011) v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC6 Apr 2021WP/2412/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order in two writ petitions where the High Court directed the respondent University to re-evaluate the petitioners' answer scripts for M.S. (Orthopedics) examination by four examiners, including digital evaluation, within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The respondent University is directed to re-evaluate the answer scripts by four examiners (two internal, two external) including digitalization within four weeks and pass appropriate awarding order.

Dr. D. Vishnu Kumar (H.T.No. 17111003011) Vs The… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶3

W.P.Nos.2236 & 2412 of 2021

¶4

COMMON ORDER:

¶5

Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

¶6

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order dated 5.8.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.13065 of 2019 and batch.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have appeared for the examination of Post Graduate Course i.e., M.S.,(Orthopedics) conducted in the month of June, 2020 and that their answer scripts were not properly evaluated. It is further contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to evaluate the answer scripts of the petitioners by four examiners i.e., two internal examiners and two external examiners and also by digital evaluation as per the law laid down by this Court in Dr. J.Kiran Kumar and others vs. State of A.P.¹ It is further contended that appropriate orders be

¶8

1 2017(6)ALT 213)

¶9

¶10

passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to evaluate the answer scripts of the petitioners in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.13065 of 2019 and batch dated 5.8.2019.

¶11

Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the 1^st respondent contended that the same procedure as directed by this Court in W.P.No.13065 of 2019 and batch was followed while evaluating the answer scripts of the petitioners. However, the respondents would once again evaluate the answer scripts of the petitioners in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.13065 of 2019 and batch dated 5.8.2019, and the respondents would exercise the process of evaluation, if not already done, and pass appropriate orders.

¶12

Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that these Writ Petitions can be disposed of directing the respondent-University to re-evaluate the answer scripts of the petitioners by four examiners i.e., two internal examiners and two external examiners, by duly following the guidelines of the respondent-University regarding digitalization as per the law laid down by this Court in Dr. J.Kiran Kumar and others vs. State of A.P, and thereafter, award the marks to the petitioners for their overall performance in Post Graduate

¶13

¶14

examination i.e., M.S. (Orthopaedics), if not already done by the respondents, and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No

¶16

costs.

¶17

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶18

_____________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶19

Date: 6.4.2021 rkk

Dr. D. Vishnu Kumar (H.T.No. 17111003011) v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. D. Vishnu Kumar (H.T.No. 17111003011) v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Md.Khadar Pasha Vs The State of Telangana

M.V. Bhadraiah Vs Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

S.Shankar Vs The Director of Horticulture State of Telangana and another

E.Srinivas Vs The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare

M.Veera Reddy and 7 others Vs The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare

B.Srihari Vs The Registrar and 2 Others