Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1383 (MP)

Arunendra Pratap Singh v. State of M. P.

2013-11-13

K.K.TRIVEDI

body2013
JUDGMENT : K.K. Trivedi, J. 1. Heard on the question of admission. Issue notice. 2. Shri Ashutosh Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer appeared and accepts notice on behalf of respondents and waives service. 3. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 4. This review application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 23.09.2013 passed in W.P. No. 6315/2012, which was decided along with many other cases. It is contended that by inadvertent mistake only a part of the order which was passed in other case was not incorporated in the order passed in the writ petition filed by the applicant and, therefore, he is denied the very same benefit which was made available to other petitioners. 5. Such a contention is not opposed by learned counsel appearing for the respondents in view of the fact that similar order was passed in W.P. No. 7780/2011 (s) on the same date i.e. on 23.09.2013 by this Court. While passing the order in the case of Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay v. State of M.P. and another, this Court has specifically directed as under: While reassessing the answer-sheets of the petitioner, the respondents will keep in mind the memorandum 03.12.1979 (Annexure P/5) issued in respect of grant of grace marks to such candidates, who have not achieved the minimum passing marks. 6. This particular observation and direction was not incorporated in the order passed in the case of applicant herein and, therefore, it is contended that such benefit is not made available to the applicant only and he is singled out. 7. After examining the order passed by this Court in writ petition of the applicant and the writ petition of Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay (supra), this Court deemed it necessary that the order passed in the case of applicant be reviewed. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that the authorities while implementing the order passed by this Court in the writ petition of the applicant will also comply with the same direction as was issued in the case of Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay (supra). It is directed that while reassessing the answer-sheets of the petitioner (applicant herein) the respondents will keep in mind the memorandum dated 03.12.1979 issued in respect of grant of grace marks to such candidates, who have not achieved the minimum passing marks. It is directed that while reassessing the answer-sheets of the petitioner (applicant herein) the respondents will keep in mind the memorandum dated 03.12.1979 issued in respect of grant of grace marks to such candidates, who have not achieved the minimum passing marks. This order passed in review application be read conjointly along with the order dated 23.09.2013 passed in W.P. No. 6315/2012 (s). 9. With the aforesaid, the review application is allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Application allowed.