Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 2199 (RAJ)

Radha Raman Hari Lath v. University of Rajasthan

2006-07-13

DALIP SINGH

body2006
Judgment Dalip Singh, J.-The petitioner appeared at the M.C.A 3rd Semester Examination in the year 1996 for which mark sheet was issued on 20.10.1997 in which the petitioner secured 57 marks in Paper IV and 34 marks in Paper V. Dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner applied for re-evaluation in both the papers i.e., Paper IV and Paper V. It is submitted that after the re-evaluation, the marks of Paper IV were increased to 62 but the re-evaluation of Paper V could not be carried out, as per the University, the answer sheet for the Paper V had been misplaced and was not traceable. 2. On account of the fact that answer sheet for the Paper V was not available and the re-evaluation could not be conducted, the respondent-university vide their letter (Annexure-12) informed the petitioner that the petitioner is required to re-appear at the said Paper V. 3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order (Annexure-12) passed by the respondents the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that the order (Annexure-12) may be quashed and the respondent may be directed to award the marks to the petitioner on the basis of the average marks of all the papers for the 3rd Semester Examination of M.C.A. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondents has submitted that Ordinance 169 G-1 of University of Rajasthan has no application to the facts and circumstances and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed average marks. This submission is based upon the contention that in the facts and circumstances as per the Ordinance 169 G-3, the petitioner is required to re-appear at the examination for the said paper in which the re-evaluation cannot be carried out on account of misplacement of the answersheet. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, has relied upon a decision of this Court in the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 192/1984 Mahesh Kumar Khandelwal vs. The University of Rajasthan wherein provisions of Ordinance 169 G-3 framed by the University of Rajasthan was held to be void and quashed and it was directed as under:- “I, therefore, hold that the word evaluation, appearing in the Ordinance 169-G(1) by necessary implication, includes revaluation and, as such, the provisions of Ordinance 169-G(1) would equally apply to the revaluation of the answer-book also. Therefore, if an answer-book has been lost or misplaced before revaluation, making revaluation impossible, the Vice-Chancellor may permit a candidate to re-appear in the paper concerned, at the special examination or to opt for the average of marks of other theoretical papers, to be taken into account in the paper concerned. Since the petitioner has opted for the latter, he is entitled thereto.” 6. In view of the above, the writ petition on the parity of reasoning of the aforesaid Judgment , in my opinion, deserves to be allowed and the respondents are hereby directed to issue a marksheet to the petitioner based upon the average marks for the M.C.A. 3rd Semester in Paper V Examination conducted by the University of Rajasthan. 7. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of .