Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mr. Samarth S.S vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 12925 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 12925 Kant
Judgement Date : 9 November, 2022

Karnataka High Court
Mr. Samarth S.S vs Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health ... on 9 November, 2022
Bench: E.S.Indiresh
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                            BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

      WRIT PETITION NO.16352 OF 2022 (EDN-RES)
                        C/W
        WRIT PETITION NO.16606 OF 2022 AND
          WRIT PETITION NO.20531 OF 2022

IN WP NO. 16352 OF 2022

BETWEEN

1.   MR. SAMARTH S.S
     S/O SATISH S R
     AGE 21 YEARS,
     UNI REG. NO.20M4370
     R/O NO.434, 7TH 'B' CROSS
     VINAYAKA LAYOUT,
     NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE
     BENGALURU - 560072.

2.   MS. SANJANA K
     D/O DR. KUMAR GOWDA S M V
     AGE: 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M4000
     R/O SAI NILAYA MUTHYLPETE
     MULBAGAL
     KOLAR - 563131.

3.   MR. SYED TAHA ZAYD
     S/O SYED MOHIUDDIN
     AGE: 19 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 20M6985
                             2




     R/O No.401A, ESTEEM ENCLAVE
     AREKERE 2ND CROSS,
     BANNERGHATTA ROAD
     BENGALURU - 560076.

4.   MR. KARTHIK S KUMAR
     S/O MR. K K SATHEESH KUMAR
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. 20M4120
     R/O CHENGAT HOUSE,
     CHANDERA MANIYAT
     KASARGOD PO
     KERALA - 673 005.

5.   MR. RAKSHITH MUDEGOWDRU
     S/O GIRISH MUDEGOWDRU
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M6196
     R/O NO. 1637/10 SADASHIVA
     1ST CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
     TARALABALU
     DAVANAGERE - 577 005.

6.   MR. FARHAD VIRAF BHADHA
     S/O MR. VIRAF F BHADHA
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 20M3174
     R/O BUILDING NO.15, FLAT NO.4,
     OLD KHAREGHAT COLONY
     HUGHES ROAD
     MUMBAI - 400 007.

7.   MR. VINAYAKA M M
     S/O MALLIKARJUNA M K
     AGE 24 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M6258
     R/O NO. 2543/1, 06TH MAIN ROAD
     M C C 'A' BLOCK,
                              3




     DAVANAGERE - 577 004.

8.   MS. ANKITA A
     D/O ASHOK AMBALGI
     AGE 22 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 19M5604
     R/O MSK MILL, GDA LAYOUT
     BEHIND CENTRAL BUS STAND
     KALABURAGI - 585 103.

9.   MR. VARUN HIREN PATHAK
     S/O HIREN TARUN PATHAK
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M4454
     R/O NO.28, SANGAM SOCIETY
     CITY LIGHT ROAD
     NUPOOR HOSPITAL
     SURAT NR
     GUJARAT - 395 007.

10 . MR. PRAJWAL BIRADAR
     S/O BASAVARAJ BIRADAR
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M5293
     H.NO. 3-104212 DARGA ROAD
     SIDDESHWAR NAGAR, GAZIPUR
     KALABURAGI - 585 102.

11 . MS. NIDHI SRIDHAR
     D/O SRIDHAR N
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 20M5883
     R/O 1217/2, 2ND BLOCK,
     BEL LAYOUT NANJAPPA ROAD
     VIDYARANYAPURA
     BENGALURU - 560097.
                              4




12 . MS. SAMITHA RANJOLKAR
     D/O SHIVARAJ RANJOLKAR
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M7184
     R/O H.NO. 10-3/9/2 PLOT NO.53
     8TH CROSS, VITTAL NAGAR
     KALABURAGI - 585 102.

13 . MS. LEKHASHREE G
     D/O G S GOVINDAPPA
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M5104
     R/O 1ST CROSS, THYAGARAJA COLONY
     MULBAGAL
     KOLAR - 563 131.

14 . MS. FIRDOSE SIDDIQ D
     D/O B DADAPEER
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG NO. 20M6146
     R/O GANESH LAYOUT, 2ND MAIN,
     5TH CROSS,
     DAVANAGERE - 577 001.

15 . MS. RAKSHITHA K M
     D/O MURALIDHARA K R
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 20M6197
     R/O GIRLS HOSTEL
     S S INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
     AND RESEARCH CENTRE, SOG COLONY
     SHRI RAMANAGARA
     DAVANAGERE - 577 003.

16 . MS. AISWARYA T S
     D/O SURESHBABU T V
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M4580
                             5




    R/O THARAYIL HOUSE, ELTHURUTH
    KODUNGALLUR PO
    THRISSUR
    KERALA - 620 680.

17 . MS. POOJA M REDDY
     D/O MANJUNATH REDDY M M
     AGE 22 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M3699
     R/O NO. 1495, 18TH CROSS,
     14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT
     1ST STAGE
     BENGALURU - 560078.

18 . MS. SHREYA
     D/O CHANNABASAVARAJ K PATIL
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 20M1013
     R/O H. NO. 8-4-45 BHER PETH NEAR
     NATH TEMPLE, ALAND
     KALABURAGI - 585 302.

19 . MS. NIKITA ARUNKUMAR KOLUR
     D/O ARUNKUMAR KOLUR
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 20M4335
     ARUNKUMAR KOLUR DSP OFFICE
     TELAGI ROAD, BASAVANA BAGEWADI
     VIJAYAPURA - 586 203.

20 . MS. SREELAKSHMI RENJITH
     D/O RENJITH THARAMMAL
     AGE 20 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 19M3865
     R/O HARISREE VILLA NO.15
     SHALIMAR GARDEN,
     ATHANIKKAL
     WESTHILL KOZHIKODE
                             6




    KERALA - 673 005.

21 . MR. DRUPADH K P
     S/O SUNIL K P
     AGE 23 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 19M3779,
     R/O SNEHATHEERAM (H) KURUNGOTTU
     PADIKKAL KANNADIKKAL VENGERI
     KOZHIKODE,
     KERALA - 673 005.

22 . MS. ELSA AJU THOMAS
     D/O AJU THOMAS
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 19M3936
     R/O A J LADIES HOSTEL
     A J INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,
     MANGALORE - 575 004

23 . MR. M B SHREYAS
     S/O M K BHASKAR
     AGE 22 YEARS
     UNI REG. NO. 19M4012
     R/O NO. 1959, 1ST MAIN,
     1ST CROSS, E BLOCK,
     3RD STAGE, DATTAGAHALLY
     MYSORE - 570 022.

24 . MS. HAFEEZAH KHANUM
     D/O NOOR KHAN
     AGE 22 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 19M0885
     R/O ABOVE INDIAN CUMC
     GANGAMMA TEMPLE ROAD,
     M V EXTENSION
     HOSKOTE
     BENGALURU - 562114.
                             7




25 . MS. GOWRI M PATTANASHETTY
     D/O MURUGESH P H
     AGE 21 YEARS
     REG. NO. 19M3650
     R/O GIRLS HOSTEL,
     BASWESHWARA MEDICAL
     COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL
     CHITRADURGA - 577 502

26 . MS. SHALINI S
     D/O SHIVAPPA N
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 19M5529
     R/O WARD NO.15, STREET NO.4,
     VINAYAKA NAGAR, CHINTAMANI
     CHIKKABALLAPURA - 563 125.

27 . MS. SUJATHA S CHAVAN
     D/O MR. SHIVAPPA H LAMANI
     AGE 21 YEARS
     UNI. REG. NO. 19M1712
     NO.7, 4TH CROSS, D-BLOCK
     KRISHNA GARDEN, R R NAGAR
     BENGALURU - 560098.
                                          ....PETITIONERS
(BY SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
      4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
      BENGALURU - 560041
      REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR.

2.    THE REGISTRAR
      RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
      OF HEALTH SCIENCES,
      4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
      BENGALURU - 560041.
                           8




3.   NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION
     UNDER-GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION BOARD
     POCKET - 14 SECTOR 8,
     DWARAKA PHASE-I
     NEW DELHI - 110 077
     BY ITS PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN.
                                      ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2
SRI N KHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO RECOMPUTE THE RESULTS OF
THE FAILED SUBJECTS OF THE MBBS (RS4) EXAMINATIONS OF
MAY, 2022 UNDERTAKEN BY ALL THE PETITIONERS BY
CONSIDERING THE HIGHEST MARKS AWARDED BY THE
EXAMINERS FROM AMONGST          THE VALUATION    MARKS
AWARDED, FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF THE
RESULTS; IN TERMS OF THE DECISION OF THE ACADEMIC
COUNCIL OF THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TAKEN ON
20.04.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-E; IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY
ORDINANCE    APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONER STUDENTS
(RS4); AND TO ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS AFRESH WITHOUT
AND DELAY; AND ETC.

IN WP NO.16606 OF 2022
BETWEEN
MR. HRISHIK REDDY R
S/O RAJA REDDY
AGE 21 YEARS
UNI REG NO.20M3334
R/O 91/B KEMPAMMA DEVI ROAD
NEW THIPPASANDRA
BENGALURU-560 075.

                                           ...PETITIONER
                            9




(BY SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

  1. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
     4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
     BENGALURU-560 041.

  2. THE REGISTRAR
     RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
     4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
     BENGALURU-560 041.

  3. NATIONAL MEDIAL COMMISSION
     UNDER- GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION BOARD
     POCKET-14, SECTOR
     DWARAKA PHASE-I
     NEW DELHI-110 077.
     BY ITS PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN.
                                         ...RESPONDENTS
  (BY SMT. FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2;
  SRI N KHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3 (V/K NOT FILED))

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO RECOMPUTE THE RESULTS OF
THE FAILED SUBJECTS OF THE MBBS(RS4) EXAMINATIONS OF
FEBRUARY, 2022 AND MBBS (RS4) EXAMINATIONS OF MAY,
2022 UNDERTAKEN BY THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE
HIGHEST MARKS AWARDED BY THE EXAMINERS FROM
AMONGST THE VALUATIONS MARKS AWARDED FOR THE
PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF THE RESULTS IN TERMS OF
THE DECISION OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL OF             THE
                                    TH
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TAKEN ON 20 APRIL, 2022 AS PER
ANNEXURE-D IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ORDINANCE APPLICABLE
TO THE PETITIONER STUDENT (RS4) AND TO ANNOUNCE THE
RESULTS AFRESH WITHOUT ANY DELAY.
                            10




IN WP NO. 20531 OF 2022

BETWEEN

MS. MAANYA H
D/O MR. H R HARISH KUMAR
AGE 20 YEARS
UNI REG NO.20M4945
R/O NO.94, 10TH MAIN
I STAGE, I BLOCK
MANJUNATHNAGAR
BENGALURU-560 010.
                                           ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

  1. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
     4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
     BENGALURU-560 041.

  2. THE REGISTRAR
     RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
     4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
     BENGALURU-560 041.

  3. NATIONAL MEDIAL COMMISSION
     UNDER-GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION BOARD
     POCKET-14, SECTOR
     DWARAKA PHASE-I
     NEW DELHI-110 077.
     BY ITS PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN.
                                         ...RESPONDENTS
  (BY SRI M S DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2;
  SRI N KHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE     NOTIFICATION      DATED     05.09.2022     WITH
                               11




NO.RGU/AUTH/24THCON/SYND/04/2022-23   NOTIFYING    THE
"ORDINANCE     /  NOTIFICATION   GOVERNING     CENTRAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (CAP) FOR THEORY PAPER
ASSESSMENT OF ALL UNDER GRADUATE HEALTH SCIENCE
COURSES OF UNIVERSITY" ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
UNIVERSITY VIDE ANNEXURE-J; ONLY INSOFAR AS IT RELATES
TO THE COMMENCEMENT / COMING INTO FORCE FROM THE
EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED ON OR AFTER 01.09.2022 AND TO
DECLARE THE ORDINANCE TO COME INTO FORCE FROM THE
EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED ON OR AFTER 01.05.2022 IN
TERMS OF THE DECISION OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL OF THE
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TAKEN ON 20.04.2022 VIDE
ANNEXURE - E; AND ETC .

    IN THESE PETITIONS, ARGUMENTS BEING HEARD,
JUDGMENT RESERVED, COMING ON FOR "PRONOUNCEMENT OF
ORDERS" TODAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

In these writ petitions, petitioners are pursuing MBBS

Course for the academic year 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 under

Revised Scheme No.4 (RS4) at various medical colleges affiliated

to respondent-Universty.

2. The petitioners had taken examination conducted by the

respondent-University in May, 2022 and being aggrieved by non-

implementation of the Resolution/decision of the Academic

Council of the respondent-University dated 20th April, 2022

regarding the procedure to be adopted for valuation of the MBBS

Theory answer-scripts, have approached this Court, seeking writ

of mandamus to respondent-University to re-compute the results

of the failed subjects of the MBBS (RS4) examination of May,

2022, by considering the highest marks of two examiners for the

purpose of computation of the results in terms of the decision of

the Academic Council dated 20th April, 2022 (Annexure-E) to the

writ petition.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the Medical Council

of India/National Medical Commission has amended the

Regulations pertaining to the MBBS Course for the Academic

year 2019-2020 onwards by Notification dated 04th November,

2019. In furtherance of the same, respondent-University had

notified the MBBS Degree course having curriculum for Phase-I

and Phase-II subjects and same was introduced for MBBS RS4

Examination. Under RS4 scheme, the scheme of examination,

question paper pattern, model question papers, etc. have been

modified and the petitioners are governed under the New MBBS

RS4 scheme and as such, the respondent-University

promulgated the "Ordinance Government Central Assessment

Program" (CAP) dated 01st February, 2021 for theory

assessment of MBBS Course, in terms of Section 35 of the

Karnataka Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1994

(for brevity hereinafter referred to as "Act') The Ordinance

dated 01st February, 2021 was challenged before this Court in

Writ Petition No.13626 of 2021 and connected petitions (MS.

SAHANA KALASAGOND AND OTHERS v. RAJIV GANDHI

UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES) and this Court, by Order

dated 07th October, 2021 set aside the ordinance dated 01st

February, 2021 and directed the respondent-University to rectify

the procedural irregularity in not securing the permission of the

Academy Council before passing the Ordinance. It is the case of

the petitioners that, upon setting aside the Ordinance dated 01st

February, 2021 by this Court, thereafter, the issue was

deliberated on 20th April, 2022 by the Academic Council with

regard to procedure to be adopted for the purpose of evaluation

and arrived at a conclusion that insofar as the examination

conducted from 01st May, 2022, only the highest of the marks

awarded by the examiners would be considered for computation

of results. Minutes of the meeting dated 20th April, 2022 is

produced at Annexure-E. At this juncture, it is relevant to

mention that the petitioners had appeared in the MBBS RS4

examination of May 2022 conducted by the respondent-

University and most of the students in the respondent-

University, including the petitioners herein, failed in theory

subjects. The respondent-University had adopted the procedure

that the marks obtained in Paper-I and II are calculated together

and those who have secured 50% aggregate, have been

declared 'Passed'. Five grace marks was also added to the

respective subjects. Thereafter, the petitioners sought for copies

of the answer-scripts from the respondent-University and came

to know that the petitioners had failed in the examination after

additional valuations being conducted. The difference between

the highest and lowest marks awarded after two valuations is

≥15% between the examiners and therefore, it is case of the

petitioners that the respondent-University has not adopted the

procedure as directed by the Academic Council by calculating the

highest of the two valuation marks awarded by the examiners.

Hence, petitioners have approached this Court in the present

writ petitions.

4. On service of notice, respondents entered appearance

and filed statement of objection contending that pursuant to the

order of this Court dated 07th October, 2021 (MS. SAHANA

KALASAGOND AND OTHERS) passed in Writ petition No.13626 of

2021 and connected petitions, based on the recommendations of

the Academic Council, meeting of the Syndicate was held and

new Ordinance dated 05th September, 2022, as per Section 35 of

the Act, was passed and therefore, the petitioners are governed

by the Ordinance dated 05th September, 2022 and not the

previous Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021. Accordingly,

respondent-University sought for dismissal of writ petitions.

5. Heard Sri Abhishek Malipatil, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners; Smt. Farah Fathima and Sri M.S. Devaraj,

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University; and Sri

N. Khetty, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-

National Medical Commission.

6. Sri Abhishek Malipatil, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners, reiterated the grounds urged in the writ petitions and

argued that non-implementation of the resolution dated 20th

April, 2022, as directed by this Court in Writ Petition No.13626

of 2021 (MS. SAHANA KALASAGOND AND OTHERS) in the

absence of "Ordinance promulgated for valuation of theory

answer-scripts (RS4)" is illegal and arbitrary in nature and

requires to be interfered with in these petitions. Emphasising on

these aspects, Sri Abhishek Malipatil, argued that this Court,

specifically directed the respondent-University to place the

Scheme of valuation before the Academic Council and thereafter

pass Ordinance in terms of Section 35 of the Act read with

Notification dated 04th November, 2019 passed by respondent

No.3 and therefore, he contended that the proceedings held by

the Academic Council has to be given effect to for the students

who had appeared for examination during May, 2022 and

therefore, sought for interference of this Court. He further

contended that the order dated 27th July, 2022 passed in Writ

Petition No.13312 of 2022 and connected petitions (Annexure-

R2), is applicable for MBBS RS5 scheme and therefore, same is

not applicable to the facts on hand. He further argued that the

observation made by this Court in Writ Petition No.14605 of

2022 and connected petitions decided on 06th September, 2022

is not applicable to the case of the petitioners and therefore he

contended that the petitioners are entitled for relief of the

resolution dated 20th April, 2022 of the Academic Council since

the examination for MBBS RS4 scheme was held in the month of

May 2022.

7. Per contra, Smt. Farah Fathima and Sri M.S. Devaraj,

learned counsel appearing for respondent-University, argued

that the petitioners are not entitled for the relief sought for, as

this Court, by order dated 07th October, 2021 passed in Writ

petition No.13626 of 2021 and connected petitions, set aside the

Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021 and thereafter, the

respondent-University has passed the Ordinance dated 05th

September, 2022 and the said Ordinance is not made

retrospective in operation and therefore, writ petitions deserve

to be dismissed in limine. Inviting the attention of the Court to

the Ordinance dated 05th September, 2022 (Annexure-R1) Smt.

Farah Fathima pointed out to the Reference in the said

Ordinance and further argued that the recommendation of the

Academic Council dated 20th April, 2022 was not notified under

the Ordinance as mandated under Section 35 of the Act and

therefore, the Ordinance dated 05th September, 2022 is the

Ordinance that is applicable for the petitioners herein. She

further contended that similarly placed students of MBBS RS4

batch who have failed in May 2022 examination, had approached

this Court in Writ Petition No.14605 of 2022 and connected

petitions and this Court, by order dated 06th September, 2022,

dismissed the batch of petitions and hence, sought for similar

orders in these petitions.

8. In the backdrop of these contentions raised by the

learned counsel for the parties, the legal issue involved in these

writ petitions are required to be answered with relevant

provisions of the Enactments. Indian Medical Council Act, 1956

(for short hereinafter referred to as the "IMC Act") has been

enacted with an object of providing for reconstitution of the

Medical Council of India, and the maintenance of a Medical

Register for India and for matters connected therewith. The IMC

Act was amended by way of Notification dated 04th November,

2019 and in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 33 of

the said Act, the Board of Governors, in supersession of Medical

Council of India with previous sanction of the Central

Government, made the following regulation to further amend the

"Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997". Clause (2)

of the amended Regulations, reads thus:

"2. (i) The Regulations of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 from clause 2 to 14 contained in Chapters I to V and the Appendices and Schedules appended therein shall be included as Part I of the Regulation. These provisions shall be the governing Regulations with respect to batches admitted in MBBS courses until academic year 2018-19.

(ii) Part II containing the following Chapters shall be added to the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 that shall be the governing Regulations with respect to batches admitted in MBBS course from academic year 2019-20 onwards."

9. The above provision of Part-II Regulations shall apply to

MBBS Course starting from academic year 2019-20. The object

of the Part-II Regulations is to create an "Indian Medical

Graduate" possessing requisite knowledge skills, attitudes,

values and responsive, to achieve national goals. Chapter VI of

the Part-II Regulations provide for Assessment; Clause 11.1

provides for Eligibility to appear for professional examination;

Clause 11.2.1 provides for direction to the Universities relating

to conduct of examinations; Clause 11.2.9 provides of

appointment of Examiners; Clause 11.2.9(j) provides that "all

theory paper assessment should be done as central assessment

programme (CAP) of concerned University". The State

Universities, like Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences in

the present case, is to establish and incorporate a Health

University for the purpose of ensuring proper and systematic

instruction, teaching, training and research in Modern Medicine

and Indian systems of Medicine in the State. Section 35 of the

Act empowers the Syndicate to make ordinances and amend or

repeal the same. Section 35(3)(b) of the Act stipulates that in

the matter relating to conduct or standard of examination or

conditions of residence of Students, the Academic Council of the

University could be consulted. Section 35(4) of the Act makes it

clear that every ordinance made by the Syndicate shall have

effect from such date as the Syndicate specifies. Ordinance

dated 15th June, 2012 promulgates, average of best of two out

of three valuation marks or average of best of four out of five

valuation marks for final computation of results in Under-

graduate and Post-graduate medical examinations respectively.

10. This Court, in the case of DR. MENAKA MOHAN AND

OHTERS v. REGISTRAR (EVALUATION), RAJIV GANDHI

UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES made in writ petition

No.48194-98 of 2018 and connected matters, held that the

Ordinance of the year 2017 is not enforceable and therefore,

directed the University to conduct examination in terms of 2012

Ordinance. Therefore, wherever there is a difference of ≥15% in

the valuation of two examiners, the same is required to be sent

for third valuation. Thereafter, the Ordinance governing Under-

graduate evaluation of answer-scripts 2019 was promulgated on

29th March, 2019 and the said 2019 Ordinance was questioned

before this Court in the case of SRI NEELESH MEHTA v. RAJIV

GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES AND ANOTHER in

Writ Petition No.31335 of 2019 and connected matters and this

Court, by order dated 18th August, 2020, quashed the 2019

Ordinance and in the meanwhile, the Medical Council of India

amended its Regulations from the Academic Year 2019-20, as

discussed above. Thereafter, the Ordinance governing valuation

of answer-scripts of MBBS course (RS-III Scheme) promulgated

on 13th October, 2020 was extensively considered with regard to

digital valuation system relating to the answers in the nature of

multiple choice, and directed the Universities to adopt the

system of 'Model Key Answers' in all the examinations of all the

courses. Further, as this Court quashed the Ordinance notified

on 13th October, 2020, thereafter, the new Ordinance was

promulgated on 01st February, 2021 by the respondent-

University governing 'Central Assessment Programme' for theory

assessment of MBBS Course as per the amended provisions

under MCI Act. This Court, by order dated 07th October, 2021

passed in Writ Petition No.13626 of 2021 and connected matters

(MS. SAHANA KALASAGOND AND OTHERS) quashed the

Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021 and as such, directed the

respondent-University to apply the provisions of the Ordinance

of 2012. However, in the case of VISHWESHWARA C. (supra),

this Court, upheld the Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021. It is

also to be noted that the learned Single Judge of this Court, in

the case of MS. PRAGYA v. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF

HEALTH SCIENCES made in Writ petition No.9004 of 2022, by its

order dated 28th April, 2022, held that the Order dated 17th

December, 2021 in the case of VISHWESHWARA C (supra) is

per-incuriam and as such, followed the judgment of this Court in

WRIT PETITION No.13626 of 2021 Connected petitions (SAHANA

KALASAGOND). Thereafter, the respondent-University has issued

another Ordinance on 05st September, 2022. In the meanwhile,

this Court, by order dated 06th September, 2022 made in the

case of SAHANA SHIVANAGOUDA MARIGOUDAR v. RAJIV

GANDHI HEALTH UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES (Writ

Petition No.14605 of 2022 and connected matters), rejected the

contentions raised by the petitioners therein seeking additional

valuation and thereby directed the respondent-University to

conduct third valuation in respect of the petitioner therein in

terms of the Ordinance dated 15th June, 2012, issued by the

respondent-University on the ground that the new Ordinance

dated 05th September, 2022 cannot be made applicable

retrospectively. It is also relevant to mention that the question

before this Court in the case of JORDAN RIDHYA RASQUINHA

AND OTHERS v. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH

SCIENCES AND OTHERS made in Writ Petition No.13312 of 2022

and connected petitions decided on 27th July, 2022 is pertaining

to RS-III (Annexure-R2) and the judgment in Writ petition

No.13626 of 2021 and connected petitions disposed of on 07th

October, 2021, has been rendered insofar as MBBS RS4 batch

(petitioners herein). Operative portion of the said judgment

reads thus:

"(1) The impugned Ordinance dated 01.02.2021, is quashed and set aside. Before promulgating the next Ordinance, the respondent-University shall ensure that the matter is placed before its Committee of Academic Council and act according to the advise of the Academic Council.

(2) Consequently, applying the provisions of the Ordinance of 2012, wherever there is difference of 15% or more between the marks awarded by the two evaluators, the same shall be sent for third valuation. In case where third valuation was already done pursuant to the impugned Ordinance, nevertheless, revaluation shall be conducted even in such cases, in terms of the Ordinance of 2012. This shall apply not only to the petitioners, but to all students, similarlysituated.

(3) Consequent to the revaluation, if a student becomes eligible to be promoted to the second year course, such student shall be permitted to attend to the second year classes.

(4) Such students shall be provided with make-up classes. However, if such students are found wanting on account of attendance to write the semester examination of the second year, alternative examination shall be conducted for such students after the minimum requirement of attendance is met.

(5) Such students who become eligible for the second year course shall be treated on par with the present second year students.

(6) The revaluation shall be conducted and results shall be announced as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(7) In case of all other students who are not successful even after the revaluation, they shall be entitled for one more additional opportunity, beyond the four prescribed attempts.

Ordered accordingly."

11. On careful examination of the observation made by

this Court in the aforementioned matters, the same would

indicate that the impugned Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021

was quashed, however, respondent-University was directed to

place the matter before the Committee of Academic Council and

act according to the advise of Academic Council before

promulgating the next Ordinance. The discussion made in the

said judgment would fortify the fact that in view of quashing the

Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021, there is no Ordinance

governing the MBBS RS4 scheme students and therefore, I find

force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing

for petitioners that the Resolution dated 20th April, 2022 by the

Academic Council shall be made applicable to the petitioners

herein i.e. MBBS RS4 Scheme. This Court set aside the

Ordinance dated 01st February, 2021 only on the ground that the

said Ordinance was promulgated without placing the same

before the Academic Council. The observation made at

paragraph 20 of the order is extracted hereinbelow:

"20. It is unfortunate that no material is placed before this Court to show that the issue was placed

beforethe Academic Council and the Academic Council deliberated upon the issue. The decision in Parents Association case was rendered on 19.12.2003. Thereafter several Ordinances have come and gone. But, other than contending that the rocedure prescribed has been followed by placing the matter before the Academic Council and thereafter Ordinances were promulgated, no material is forthcoming to show that the Academic Council deliberated upon the issue threadbare."

(emphasis supplied)

12. The above judgment was rendered on 07th October,

2021 and thereafter, the respondent-University placed the

material before the Academic Council, in terms of the Order of

this Court referred to above. Matter was deliberated on 20th

April, 2022 and in the 170th Syndicate held on 07th June, 2022, it

was resolved that the matter was deliberated before the

Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate; and the Vice-

Chancellor would take decision in the matter at the earliest. This

would clearly establish the fact that pursuant to the order of this

Court, the respondent-University had taken a decision. The

relevant portion of the deliberation made on 20th April, 2022

reads as under:

"Deliberation: the Registrar (evaluation) briefed the members regarding the multiple judgments in the court proceedings related to Examination valuation. In order to reduce the number of students approaching the court for the valuation related matters, it was requested to come up with an ordinance governing the valuation pattern to be followed in concurrence with the respective apex body valuation guidelines and with the best practices followed across the country in other universities. The ordinance be made so that it is applicable from the forth coming examinations scheduled across faculties form 1st May, 2022 onwards, irrespective of the scheme of examination or date of admission."

The members deliberated on the issue and the following resolutions were made.

"All the answer scripts of the under graduate, Post Graduate, Super Speciality and all other courses in Medical/ Dental/ Ayush/ Physiotherapy/ Nursing/ Pharmacy/ Allied Health Sciences shall be subjected to two evaluations by eligible examiners of the respective faculties through the digital valuation system. The highest of the total marks awarded by the two evaluators for the paper which is rounded off to the next highest shall be considered for computation of results. The marks awarded and the results so declared shall be final and under no circumstances further valuation shall be entertained."

This shall be applicable from the forth coming examinations scheduled across faculties from 1st May 2022 onwards, irrespective of the scheme of examination or date of admission."

13. Having taken note of the judgments referred to above

and the conclusion reached out by the Academic Council, I am of

the view that the highest of the total marks awarded by the two

valuators shall be considered for computation of the results. In

that view of the matter, in the absence of any ordinance

promulgated for the conduct of the valuation of the answer-

scripts of MBBS RS4 scheme, the respondent-University ought to

have considered the deliberations made before the Academic

Council for the purpose of the examinations held for MBBS RS4

course till the promulgation of the new Ordinance on 05th

September, 2022. Suffice to say that the respondent-University

ought to have adopted the procedure, as mentioned in the said

deliberation that the decision to take the highest of the two

valuations shall be made applicable to the examinations

commencing from 1st May 2022, irrespective of the scheme of

the examination.

14. I am also aware about the settled principle that

interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India is limited insofar as educational matters are concerned,

however, having taken note of the grievance urged by the

petitioners, pointing out the illegality committed by the

respondent-University by applying Ordinance of their choice

contrary to the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.13626

of 2021 and connected petitions (MS. SAHANA KALASAGOND

AND OTHERS) wherein this Court, specifically directed the

respondent-University to rectify the mistake while passing the

Ordinance without placing the same before the Academic Council

and further the Academic Council had deliberated the matter

before the commencement of May 2022 examination and had

come to a conclusion to pass the students who had secured

highest marks of the two valuers and therefore, I am of the

opinion that the arguments advanced by the learned counsel

appearing for the respondent is contrary to the directions issued

by this Court in writ petition No.13626 of 2021 and connected

petitions disposed of on 07th October, 2021 and therefore invites

interference of this Court in the peculiar facts and circumstances

of the case. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered

opinion that the petitioners herein have made out a case for

interference in respect of the procedure adopted by the

respondent-University for MBBS RS4 scheme. Hence, I pass the

following:

ORDER

1. Writ petitions are allowed;

2. Writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent-

University to re-compute the results of the students of MBBS (RS4) Examination conducted during May, 2022 in terms of the decision of the Academic Council of the respondent-University dated 20th April, 2022;

3. The respondent-University is directed to complete the entire exercise of re-computing the results within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order and announce the results in view of the observation made above;

4. Consequent upon revaluation of the result, if the student becomes eligible to be promoted to the second year or third year course, such student shall be permitted to attend the classes of second year or third year of MBBS classes, as the case may be;

5. Such students shall be provided with make-up classes. However, if such students are found wanting on account of attendance to write the annual examination of second year or third year, alternative examination shall be conducted for such students, after the minimum requirement of attendance is met.

6. Such students who become eligible for the second year or third year course, shall be treated on par with the present second year or third year MBBS Course students.

SD/-

JUDGE

lnn

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter