Smt. Archana Pareek vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3917 MP

                                        1

              The High Court of Madhya Pradesh
                      Bench at Gwalior
                         WP-4052-2021
           [Smt. Archana Pareek Vs State of M.P. & Anr.]

Gwalior, Dated:03/08/2021

      Shri Rishikesh Bohare, learned counsel for petitioner.

      Shri Ankur Mody, learned Additional Advocate General for

respondents/State.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard through

video conferencing.

Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute that the

relevant Rules regulating the examination procedure of Middle

School Teacher Eligibility Test, 2018 do not contain any enabling

provisions for rounding off of marks.

In the present case, the sole prayer is that the marks

awarded to the petitioner which are of 89.67 should be rounded

off to 90.06 which are the minimum proportionate marks

prescribed for being eligible for the post of Middle School

Teacher.

This Court is bolstered in its view by the decisions in cases

Orissa Public Service Commission and Anr. Vs. Rupashree

Chowdhary and Anr, (2011) 8 SCC 108, Registrar, Rajiv

Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore Vs. G.

Hemlatha and Ors., (2012) 8 SCC 568, order dated 24.04.2015

passed in W.A. No.230/2015 of this Court and Taniya Malik

Vs. Registrar General of the High Court of Delhi, (2018) 14

SCC 129 where following proposition is laid down. Relevant

portion in the case of Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of

Health Sciences (supra) is reproduced below for ready reference

and convenience:-

"12. No provision of any statute or any rules framed thereunder have been shown to us, which permits rounding- off of eligibility criteria prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the PG course in M.SC (Nursing). When eligibility criteria is prescribed in a qualifying examination, it must be strictly adhered to. Any dilution or tampering with it will work injustice on other candidates. The Division Bench of the High Court erred in holding that learned Single Judge was right in rounding-off of 54.71% to 55% so as to make respondent 1 eligible for admission to PG course. Such rounding-off is impermissible."

In the case of Taniya Malik (Supra) the similar view has

been reiterated by the Supreme Court. In the said judgment, it has

been observed as under :-

"22. With regard to question as to rounding off of the marks, in our opinion, when a particular aggregate is prescribed for eligibility, a person must meet the criteria without relaxation. It is not permissible to enhance the marks by rounding off method to make up the minimum aggregate."

In view of above, in absence of any provision of rounding

off of marks, judicial orders cannot be passed.

At this juncture, learned counsel for petitioner prays for a

direction to the competent authority to consider the representation

of the petitioner praying for rounding off of marks in case, the

Rules provide for any such provisions.

In view of aforesaid findings that the Rules do not permit

rounding off, the prayer made by petitioner cannot be acceded to.

Accordingly, present petition stands dismissed.

                                                 (Sheel Nagu)                    (Deepak Kumar Agarwal)
                                                   Judge                                 Judge
vpn
                    VIPIN KUMAR
                    AGRAHARI
                    2021.08.04 11:29:10
                    +05'30'
 VALSALA
 VASUDEVAN
 2018.10.26
 15:14:29 -07'00'