High Court Karnataka High Court

Dr Vasudeva Murthy H S S/O Late … vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health … on 24 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Dr Vasudeva Murthy H S S/O Late … vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health … on 24 March, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
IN THE HIGH coup? or KARNATAKA AT  

DATED THIS THE 24"' a4yoF  _ J %  

Berogg  : *

THE HON'BLE MR.JU5TICE'go!-«IAN'SHAN'fA!§:A§O¥;lDAR--:V: %

wan' PETITION  
BE'i'WEE::2N: V  A " ' 

ihuvasudeva M_1Lrthy'ki..$f  A
S[o.lateSid§1appa H V     
R/at.Lakshzuisi:V-N:-'~zga:--...__  "  '
Near Tz*av§;11¢jJ;e'§»'_Bur:ga1{§t:?_' A_  '
At:K9_du1.f '~ _   . .. PETFFIONER
(By  R;L..Péa i2'I:'f<éi*  Patii, Adv$.,)

AND: V " M " %

I.-iféajiv Gaxidifi iinvfsrsity of
"  'Health ASciencés""
Kaxnataka, 4311* '1' Biock, Jayanagar

« $ ' A  

L  The .R$gi§tra1* (iévaiuation)

 Rajiv'uan'"' dhi UnIvc' rsity of
Bcaith Sciences
Kamataka, 4"! '1' Block, Jayanagar

'T gaangaiorc .. RESPONDENTS

(By Sri N.K.Ramesh, Adv.)

-2-

This Writ petition is filed under Articles A. of
the Constitution of India, praying to take intci accxétxni i.£1a7c_

un-tampered marks in the 4*” evaluation of Gi%4§Il ”
Am:1e:mr¢-G to the wrii pefition and conseqm%~n’f.5a1i},€V dcclarea b

the pctziticmcr a pass in M.D.Gcnej::iI’B1Iedic§ne,. cfi::§._ V ;

‘§’his writ petition comm’ g jv, in

B–Gmot1p, this day the CouI’t»i:t};;dc th:=.:_

The ffiiashing the 4&1
vaJuatjo11_ Z: A ‘ “1V1:edicine–11 paper of
the £0 the University to re-

awatfi the-L -‘(allegedly tampered) to the
petitio’1ié=:1én’_’ -.3:’1cVi’ “pass” in M.1).General

Me.-{iicine exénzinaticn.

records disciose that the petitioner was

H his Depaztment and was dejputed to do

.Aia:$térs in Medicine Course to BLUE Education

V’ * Sdcietfi’/, Bijapur. He compieted his course in 2007 and

Vappeared for the examination during September 2007.

There would be four theory papers and me practical.

{/3

-3,

Four theory papers will have maximum “100

and practical examination will have

300. The candidate will :31a’¢’55’ e’..1′:0 4.:

marks of 200 in all thee”i’mV.zr fer:

himself declared as

The resuits were announced
in octotm ¢gg:;7 :;,ep¢s;mo;;ardec;m as “raw,
Being applied for answer
A an application under
“Information Act. Accordingly,

the vaiiajat;’1:011.V’s1i;5. 1;-gee “furnished to the petitioner by the

as per Annexure-G to the writ

found that there are certam’

A in the 4″‘ valuation done by the examiner,

AA petition is filed. praying for aferementioned

‘ ‘ — reiiefs.

5/’

– 5-

not permit either for revaluation or for taki11g”=fH2to

consideration the un-amended marks.

Be that as it may, this Court cannot sifiéts

of appeal in such matters. It is”for”t.£1_e ‘9i;*ho~’

evaluate the papers to A. on ifpz_eI’its’; V’

Court also eamlot de1’iI1ite1j:*s«:sa3y the ‘V

original marks wilictfwere the j*)et;it ioner in
the 431 valuation of the
facts and my considered
opinion, ” “fiaet if the papeluil of
Generzsi’ is evaluated once
again valuation marks. The 4″‘

valufaiion S’fii:t!V[‘ retéooe by an independent examiner.

jzhe of the 431 valuation so done, the

A joeiiitioner shall be announced based on the

ACeoi’dingJy, the foilowing order is madm-

{P/’*

-5.

The marks assigned to the petitioner in the _4=h
valuation to the paper–11 of General Medicines A4
to the petitioner, are quashed. The paper~ii *
Medicines of the petitioner shallibe
independent professor. Based on tize
the 4th valuation, the res13JtViof:t~_1E1e

announced.

Writ pet;ition_’1s dispe-gekd

*ck/ –