Judgment Rajesh Balia, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This petition has been preferred by group of students of S.N. Medical College, who had appeared in Professional Course M.B.B.S. Part II Examination (Main), which was held in August, 2004. The result of the main Examination was declared on 20.12.2004. Each of the petitioners have failed in multiple subjects. 3. The mark-sheets have been attached to the writ petition of few of petitioners. 4. After the result was declared in December, 2004, applications for revaluation/scrutiny of marks was submitted within time, the result whereof was declared in March, 2005. 5. Apart from the provision for making an application for scrutiny of marks and for revaluation of answer books, the rules also permit taking of Supplementary Examination to the M.B.B.S. II Examination in papers in which a candidate has failed, subject to conditions for taking such examinations. 6. According to the averments made in the petition, such Supplementary/remand Examination was held soon after the result was declared on 20.12.2004 i.e., in January, 2005 and result whereof was also declared in March, 2005. It may not be out of place to note that medical colleges, which are six in numbers in Rajasthan, are affiliated to University of Rajasthan and common examinations are conducted for all of them and there is a common examination scheme. 7. The grievance ventilated in this petition is stated to be of public interest is about schedule of holding of remand examination and declaration of revaluation/scrutiny of marks. It is stated that the schedule of two schemes have not be devised properly so as to eliminate the requirement of reappearing of students in subjects in which they may be declared pass as a result of revaluation/scrutiny of marks, so as to avoid duplication of efforts made by the students. 8. Prima facie the dispute raised in this petition appears to be individual to each student who has failed. It is within his option to choose either or both methods of keeping pace with his own batch. In case of a candidate, who has not failed may also opt for revaluation to improve his result. The grievance being related to individual interest of a failed candidate in the matter of availing beneficial provision to soften the rigors of result, cannot be said to be a public interest as such, though may relate to class of unsuccessful candidates. In case of a candidate, who has not failed may also opt for revaluation to improve his result. The grievance being related to individual interest of a failed candidate in the matter of availing beneficial provision to soften the rigors of result, cannot be said to be a public interest as such, though may relate to class of unsuccessful candidates. However, we do not propose to non-suit the petitioners in this case on that ground alone. We have examined the merits of contention also and do not find any merit in it as we shall presently discuss. 9. It has been urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, that it is evident from the facts that some of the students who, had appeared at the remand/supplementary examination which were held in January, 2005, were declared passed in some papers and later on in those subjects their result in main examination was also varied to pass as a result of revaluation. 10. According to learned Counsel this shows that scheduling of revaluation and remand examination is not properly co-ordinated and detrimental to the interest of students in general, Therefore, mandamus is sought for rescheduling the time within which application for revaluation can be made in a manner that the result of revaluation be made known before the supplementary examinations are held. 11. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that scheme of professional examination of .M.B.B.S. reveals that provision for appearing at supplementary/remand examination by those who have failed in one or more subjects of second professional examination as well as a provision for revaluation/scrutiny of marks as per the Ordinance of the Rajasthan University, which conducts .M.B.B.S. Examination are two distinct provisions made for the benefit of students who have failed or secured lesser marks and operate in independent fields. Both the schemes are optional, and can be availed by the concern student at his volition simultaneously or one or other as per his opinion. The two ought not to be mixed up. 12. The two schemes are in the nature of exception to general rule that result at main Examination of any discipline ordinarily prevails. Where a student, who has failed in one or more subjects, remains at the same phase of studies until he passes out alongwith the students joining him at that stage at the next regular examination. 13. 12. The two schemes are in the nature of exception to general rule that result at main Examination of any discipline ordinarily prevails. Where a student, who has failed in one or more subjects, remains at the same phase of studies until he passes out alongwith the students joining him at that stage at the next regular examination. 13. Scheme of supplementary/remand examination, within a specified period, is aimed to provide an accelerated opportunity to such students, who have failed, to keep pace with his batch by enabling him to join his batch by taking the supplementary/remand examination before the main examination of the higher class. This facility is extended only to those, who have failed. 14. On the other hand the facility of revaluation or scrutiny of marks is a provision of general application to all the examinations of the University for improvement of result. It does not depend upon the fact whether a student has failed or passed. The provision of revaluation/scrutiny of marks can be availed by any student, who has passed, for improving his result whether he has passed in the concerned paper as well as by those, who have failed in some subjects. Unlike opportunity to take supplementary examination, it is not linked with a candidate failing in any subject. 15. The manner and method of providing this opportunity is a policy decision of the University and does not call for interference as operation of either of them are not in conflict with each other and they are not detrimental to the interest of students in any manner. 16. The relevant provision assimilated from the syllabi, which in turn is founded on Medical Council of India Regulation on Graduate Medical Education 1997, issued by the University of Rajasthan for Faculty of Professional Medicine M.B.B.S. Examination, 2003-2004 shows that: “(i) Every student shall undergo a period of certified study extending over 4 ½ academic years divided into 9 semesters (i.e., of six months each) from the date of commencement of his/her study for the subjects comprising the medical curriculum to the date of completion of examination and followed by one year compulsory rotating internship. Each semester will consist of approximately 120 teaching days of 8 hours each college working time including one hour of lunch. (ii) The period of 4 ½ years is divided into three phases.” 17. Each semester will consist of approximately 120 teaching days of 8 hours each college working time including one hour of lunch. (ii) The period of 4 ½ years is divided into three phases.” 17. Phase-I is of two semesters consisting of Pre-clinical subjects. 18. Phase-II consists of three semester (3 to 5), and Phase-III is continuation of study of Clinical subjects for seven semesters after passing Phase-I (6 to 9). 19. Along with the above provision, scheme of passing of examination is stated as under:- “1. The first 2 semesters (approximately 240 teaching days) shall be occupied in the phase-I (Pre-Clinical subjects and introduction to a broader understanding of the perspectives of medical education leading to delivery of health care. No student shall be permitted to join the Phase-II (Para-clinical/Clinical) group of subjects until he has passed in all the Phase-I (Pre-clinical) Subjects for which, he will be permitted not more than four chances (actual examination), provided four chances are completed in three years from the date of enrolment. 2. Passing in Ist Professional is compulsory before proceeding to Phase-II training. 3. A student, who fails in the IInd Professional examination shall, not be allowed to appear in IIIrd Professional (Part-I) examination unless he passed all subjects of IInd Professional examination. 4. Passing in IIIrd Provisional (Part-I) examination is not compulsory before entering for 8th and 9th Semester training however passing of IIIrd Professional (Part-I) is compulsory for being eligible for IIIrd professional (Part-II) examination. 5. Supplementary examination may be conducted within six months so that the students, who pass, can join the main batch and the failed students will have to appear in the subsequent year.” 20. The aforesaid scheme of examination goes to show that the First Professional examination is to be conducted during II semester and relates to Pre-clinical subject. This First Professional examination can be passed by taking four chances within three years from the date of enrolment. But a student, who fails, is not allowed to join his batch in between and remains in a batch separated from main batch and takes his examination of II nd Professional only after passing the subjects of Ist Professional examination. 21. This First Professional examination can be passed by taking four chances within three years from the date of enrolment. But a student, who fails, is not allowed to join his batch in between and remains in a batch separated from main batch and takes his examination of II nd Professional only after passing the subjects of Ist Professional examination. 21. As noticed above, Phase-II and Phase-II are continuing course of Para-clinical and Clinical subjects for seven semesters after passing Phase-I. The rule providing for conduct of supplementary examination within six months of the declaration of result of main examination shows that a student can join the main batch at next semester but those, who failed to pass supplementary examination within six months, they have to reappear in the subsequent year. 22. The scheme for candidates, who have failed in one or more subject of any examination of M.B.B.S. is contained in Ordinances 275 and 275 A, which reads as under:-“Ordinance 275 - A candidate who has failed in one or more subjects at the First, Second or the Final M.B.B.S. Examination may, at his option take the examination in parts in one or more subjects in which he has failed, or in whole, provided, however, he passes all the subjects prescribed for the examination. Ordinance 275-A - At the expiry of each period of four attempts including the examination at which the candidate appeared in all the subjects prescribed for the examination, another period of the same duration will follow during which the provisions of Ordinance 275 above shall be applicable as regards passing the examination.” 23. The provisions contained in Ordinance and Schedule of Supplementary Examination revealed in syllabus show, that it is not the scheme that supplementary examinations are held soon after the result is declared. As a matter of fact, at the end of every semester, which is of six months duration, examinations in M.B.B.S. are held and students, who fail in main examination, are allowed to appear at the ensuing examination held at the end of the current semester for the same papers in which he has failed. Six months time for holding supplementary examination is another limit within which it is required to be held. So there is no room for fixing or altering the date for holding supplementary examinations independently. Six months time for holding supplementary examination is another limit within which it is required to be held. So there is no room for fixing or altering the date for holding supplementary examinations independently. It is a facility provided for candidates, who have failed to keep pace with the main batch to which to belong by giving them an accelerated opportunity of appearing at the examination of the such subjects in which he has failed which are held during ensuing semester. But those, who fail in supplementary examination also, have to appear as failed candidates at the subsequent years main examination, and lose chance to join their own batch. 24. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners that remand/supplementary examinations must be held after the declaration of revaluation result is not contemplated under the scheme of the University Ordinance or the Examination Rules, which is appropriately a policy to be devised by the University. Nor it can be said to be detrimental to students interest. Whether a student has failed in any subject can be known only on declaration of result of main Examination which may necessitate taking of supplementary Examination. Hence, some time lag is needed to be given between the declaration of main result and holding of supplementary examination in order to enable the candidates to prepare for such examination. 25. As against making available an opportunity of appearing in supplementary examination for keeping pace with the main batch, the provision of revaluation contained in Ordinance 157 is of general nature for improving result whether by failed candidate or passed candidate. It inter alia provides as under:- Ordinance 157 “Any candidate, who has appeared at an examination conducted by the University, may apply to the Registrar for the scrutiny of his marks and the re-checking of his result. Such applications must be made so as to reach the Registrar within one month from the date of the declaration of the result by the University. 26. Ordinance 157-A further regulates the scheme of revaluation, which inter alia provides that: Ordinance 157-A “Revaluation of answer books shall be permissible in not more than 50% of the theory papers including compulsory, core, subsidiary, Honours, additional or any other papers in which a candidate actually appeared at an examination. 26. Ordinance 157-A further regulates the scheme of revaluation, which inter alia provides that: Ordinance 157-A “Revaluation of answer books shall be permissible in not more than 50% of the theory papers including compulsory, core, subsidiary, Honours, additional or any other papers in which a candidate actually appeared at an examination. Where the number of papers in which a candidate appeared at an examination happens to be an odd number, it will be increased by one for the purpose of reckoning 50% of the papers.” 27. Ordinance 157-A further clarifies that revaluation of answer books of those papers shall be permissible in which a candidate re-appears for improvement of performance. Thus, revaluation is for improvement of performance whereas supplementary examination is an accelerated opportunity to march with the pace of M.B.B.S. Examination. 28. It reflects the operation of revaluation scheme while envisaging that revaluation shall not be permitted in respect of scripts of practical examinations, sessional/periodical tests, dissertation, thesis and viva-voce and all supplementary examination, special examination, part examination, back papers and boycotted papers. Revaluation is also not permissible in respect of M.E., D.M. and M.Ch. Examinations in the Faculty of Medicine and M. Phil. Examinations. 29. The process of revaluation has been stated in Para No. 7, 8 and 9 of Ordinance 157-A, which reads as under:-Ordinance 157-A-“7. Revaluation shall be done by an examiner to be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor from a panel of recommended by the Committee for Selection of Examiners/Convener. 8. Each answer-book shall be revalued by one examiner only. 9. (1) (i) If the award of the second examiner (revaluator) is more than the award of first examiner subject to a limit of 20% of the maximum marks prescribed for the paper, the same shall be taken as the marks obtained on revaluation. In case the award of the second examiner (revaluator) excess the above limit of 20% the answer-book shall be referred to a third examiner and the average of the two closest awards shall be taken into account. If the three awards are uniformly spread, then the middle award shall be taken into account. (ii) (a) If the award of the second examiner (revaluator) is less than that of the first examiner upto the extent of 5% of the maximum marks prescribed for the paper, the award of the first examiner shall stand. If the three awards are uniformly spread, then the middle award shall be taken into account. (ii) (a) If the award of the second examiner (revaluator) is less than that of the first examiner upto the extent of 5% of the maximum marks prescribed for the paper, the award of the first examiner shall stand. .(b) In case the award of the second examiner (revaluator) is less than that of the first examiner and the decrease is more than 5% but not more than 20% of the maximum marks prescribed for the paper, the average of the two awards shall be taken as the marks of revaluation provided the result of the candidate is not affected adversely, i.e., his division is not changed or he does not get supplementary instead of pass or he does not fail instead of supplementary or he does not fail in an individual paper/subject instead of pass. In such cases the marks shall be decreased to the extent that his result is not affected adversely. .(c) If the award of the second examiner (revaluator) is less than that of the first examiner and the decrease in marks exceeds 20% of the maximum marks prescribed for the paper, the answer-book shall be referred to a third examiner and the average of the two closest awards (the middle award in case the three awards are uniformly spread) shall be taken as the marks of revaluation subject to the proviso mentioned above in Sub-section (ii)(b). (iii) The candidate, who appears at the supplementary of main examination and also applies for revaluation in that/those papers and if the result of revaluation is declared after appearance at the supplementary of main examination, in such a case the better performance may be taken into account if the candidate so wishes.” 30. From the scheme of revaluation, it is clear that it not dependent on re-examination of answer books of a few students of Faculty of Medicine only by another examiner only. It is a complicated process and alteration of result is not as a matter of course but has to undergo the process of comparison of results at different steps and at time the answer book has to go to even a third examiner and then comparison of three results is to be done. It is a complicated process and alteration of result is not as a matter of course but has to undergo the process of comparison of results at different steps and at time the answer book has to go to even a third examiner and then comparison of three results is to be done. Final result is declared by the examination cell by working out permutation-commutation of the marks allotted by different examiners. 2.31. Sub-clause (9)(c)(iii) takes care of contingency, subject matter of this petition, and it offers a better option to the student to retain better of the two results. 3.32. Looking to the large number of candidates applying for revaluation, passed as well as failed, in different faculties, interference by this Court for rescheduling the revaluation of papers for medical colleges, only would be more hazardous than result in any relief, apart from the fact that this is not the domain of the judicial review to legislate and lay down the policy for University in relation to holding the examination and for incidental matters relating to revaluation and supplementary examination. 33. Moreover, we do not see that two provision, which operate on different fields, are in any way in conflict with each other or detrimental to the interest of students so as to warrant interference in extra ordinary jurisdiction. It may also be noticed that recourse to any of the courses is not a compulsion but depends on volition of candidate. If the candidate wants to take a chance by taking advantage of two schemes, it is for him to choose. If in the process, if some result overlaps, it cannot make the schemes arbitrary or causing any injury to the interest of the students. If a students. who has failed and wants to accelerate his progress, opts to take the examination in which he has failed, it is for him to devote time and study the subject in which he has failed to get the result. Merely because students has to study the subject in which he has failed cannot be said to be a matter adverse to him. Simultaneously, if he also wants to take chance to improve his performance by resorting to revaluation in any subject within permissible limit, he can opt for it without prejudice to his other options. 4.34. Merely because students has to study the subject in which he has failed cannot be said to be a matter adverse to him. Simultaneously, if he also wants to take chance to improve his performance by resorting to revaluation in any subject within permissible limit, he can opt for it without prejudice to his other options. 4.34. It may also be considered from the point of view that if there were no scheme of supplementary examination, which the University is not bound to provide, then students would have to wait until next annual examination alongwith other batch and would have to waste more time. In that case also he would have restudied before appearing in the examination. Therefore, availing of opportunity to accelerate the advancement in the course cannot be said to be burdensome or causing adverse effect on the students interest in any manner. 5.35. In the like way, it is also not mandatory for the University to make provision for revaluation/re-checking of results. 6.36. It may also be noticed that providing for this beneficial legislation is not mandatory for the University. It is within the domain of the University to provide for revaluation or for holding supplementary examination for any course. It does not give any corresponding right to students seeking a mandamus for such rescheduling. 7.37. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.