Karnataka High Court
Dr Nithya T vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health ... on 7 February, 2022
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.24502 OF 2021 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. NITHYA T.,
D/O THANGARAJI A.,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 104/1, 4TH CROSS, 2A MAIN,
NANJAPPA LAYOUT, VIDYARANYAPURA
BENGALURU - 560 097.
...PETITIONER
(BY MISS. SUMANA BALIGA M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA - 560 041,
REP. BY REGISTRAR EVALUATION.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE
DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO DECLARE THE
PETITIONER AS PASS IN THE EXAMINATION IN THE DISCIPLINE
OF MD GENERAL SURGERY (RS-3) EXAMINATION CONDUCTED
BY THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
HELD ON NOVEMBER 2021 BY ROUNDING OFF THE MARKS
FROM 49.75 PERCENT TO 50 PERCENT AS PER THE DECISION
OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.11348/2020 AND
WA.547/2021 AND AS PER THE DECISION OF SYNDICATE
2
MEETING HELD ON 12.11.2020 AND 17.11.2020 AS PER
ANENXURE-F AND F12.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING-
B GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The subject matter of this Writ Petition is substantially
similar to the one in W.P.No.11348/2020 between
DR. GURUPRASAD Vs. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF
HEALTH SCIENCE, disposed off by this court vide judgment
dated 20.10.2020, a copy whereof the respondent-University
has placed as document No.5 in the Memo dated 8.2.2022
filed this day.
2. Para 3B of the above judgment reads as under:
"3(b) as per the extant norms of the
respondent-University for passing in the
examination a student has to secure 50% in the
theory papers in aggregate and 50% in the practical
+ viva voce; petitioner has secured 49.75% in the
theory papers and 70% in the practical + viva voce;
paragraph 5(I)(b) of the subject Ordinance reads
"the average of the best four total marks for the
paper awarded by five evaluators, which is
rounded off to the nearest value, shall be
considered for final computation of the results";
since arithmethically petitioner has secured
49.75%, the said figure has to be rounded off to the
next whole and that will be 50%."
3. Pursuant to this, relief was granted to the
petitioner in the cognate case and therefore, on the principle
of parity, relief cannot be denied to the petitioner. The
Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.932-933/1974
between A.V.VINODA & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF
KARNATAKA BY ITS COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY
disposed off on 11.12.1974, has held that the Court should
treat like-cases alike and if relief is granted to a litigant,
similar relief cannot be denied to other similarly
circumstanced litigant as well, there being no derogatory
circumstances.
4. There is also force in the submission of learned
Panel Counsel that the inner voice of the cognate judgment is
that grace of one mark avails where awarding thereof would
make good the deficiency of required minimum of 200 and not
otherwise; however, the apprehension that even where more
than one mark would make good the deficit, others may claim
the grace, is ill-placed inasmuch as that is not the case made
out in the petition.
In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds;
Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent-University to
round off 49.75 % to 50 % and to announce the result afresh
within two weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE
cbc
