IN THE HIGH comm' 0? KARNA*m<AJAA':f EANGA kk
DATED THIS THE 2 1st my O1I3'«V£'+'i§ABA}?Ufii2.'SL' 2%G9§&\'%:%\/,.; %'i%
BEFORE» % {%
THE HONBLE Mr, JUSTI¢'i§§--A;}}?r J GUMAL
WRIT PE'I'I'I'IO1\f Nq.' 1j:?:§¥*?i1%o§* 2§Q9.{EDN)
D/osfiTiNaanaL;»'{T~~
Aged about; 1 yea:fs, .. '
Residizftg at N"o._642,F '
_ am m«.:;ckF%~1om 'E'
V 'Rajsijir'1a§gar,"'*
':_VEa:1ga1o1jea~e-'«5_6*O___O 10.
(Sri Nagamga, Advs.)
" The Rég'strar (Evaluation),
'Ba:.';1gs££ere University,
. _V College Campus,
< % . .VBai'1ga1ore.
" " {Sri Giri Gowda, Advs)
2. The Principal,
K.L.E. So.diI'CCt the 15*
mspondent to issue tha" i£:'.1?Fi"I'» ,sem£$1;er, marks card
(Reg.No.O5AZS7O 189) cgffl May' ._2Q0€3"= "incorporating
the internal afss5e}:§ssme;;ut ma1'k_s"~a°.1:.._the":marks card and
direct the tfiévdamages etc.
W.P Pre1imi':ra,a1:'y hc-:ar;n' g this
day, the made'.1i:>11owiI1g:
V--oRDER .....
V " is before this for the second
tgi15m_3'."'% HG? g,'*r:ievan.ce is that her internal assessment
fiavs not been included in the: sectmd semester
card. K'
J
2. The petitioner joined the second res_po't1djez1t.V
college for B.Sc. Bio-Teehnoiogz. Petitioner '
the first semester B.Se. Bio--TeehIi'oIo?g'y« V
completed the first semester. A. '2a«1i'»'v
forwarded the internal assesseeexut 'V
semester students Tm
respondent - University. 22.4.2006
and received evebiythe :iUftiiterSitA§”:i)r1.’__..§«4.4.2OO6. The
petitierier semester examination. The
marks Witliout adding the marks
of internal assessment’; Hence, application was given by
tliewlst respondent to issue marks Gard
internal assessment marks. Hence a
_ writ’-. A was filed. This Court directed the
W H ” to consider the representation/application
Viixelude the internal assessment marks in the marks
T ” An endorsement is issues by the responders: –~–
: University indimting that the interns} assessment fl
4
marks submitted after the declaration of results of any
course W131 not be treated as valid and would
considered fer inclusion in the marks
levying pena} fine. ‘ ‘ ‘M L’
3. Mr. K. Nagaraja,
the petitiener submits that for_:.r1o 0f ‘V L,
iniema} marks are not He 1;if;a£ it is
not in éispute that ” for the
intemai examination axlriitlfge by the
– Collegcfl “”” subfifit$ that the internal
aSS€SSIIx1AGtf1t”IfiaI’krS b€:§§I}{§1″t}df3Ci in the marks card.
,4 “learned counsel appearing for
V’ “‘i1»3’1’V’3V’»t’?;’)I13¢5¥,’e”fi11§miiémfi$at hard copy as well as soft copy
evas. k <§:r:#T~.jt;%2.4.2006 and was received by the
Univarsifiy .(u)fiAT24.4.2OO6. Indeed he submits that the
xoflthe petitioner is at SI.No.18¢%, which also fl
/
X
""eo:1tiz.1;i.1o.;;1s «list eoimnencixig from Sl.No. 1 on wards
~4s;1::<:i"'_jgoi11g beyond S1.No. :84. S1.No.184» is
185;' This itself is an indication that there is no
A Renee, it is not open for the University
'11' -is eomend that there is an interpolation and it has been fl
5
discioses the marks obtained by her in the ,
assessment. He has also made available the . V’
5. Mr. Giri Gowda, learner} Zcéouzfusei
the respondent —- University’iV_sn_bmits ‘uthat =
sheet was sen: by the ebziege i.e., after
the declaratiogm the u to the
resolution cif” §i1e’~:»Aintema1 assessment
marks es” 1} “”” new:
6. is at S1.No.184. It is
not as $’I.~NVo.3_8v4 last on the iist. It is
. there after the nasse of Ranjitha at
/
X
7
(4) H1126 is issued and made absolute.
Compliance in four weeks from the da’£;E::”of
of this order.
AMY/–