Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Muhammed Jaseel.P, a student of City College of Physiotherapy, Mangalore, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. He sought a direction to the respondents, Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences and its Registrar of Evaluations, to conduct a third evaluation of his answer scripts for three subjects: Principles of Physiotherapy Practice and Research (QP Code 8121), Physical and Functional Diagnosis (QP Code 8122), and Musculoskeletal Disorders and Sports (QP Code 8124), in terms of the notification governing multiple valuation dated 29.03.2019. The petitioner was represented by Sri M.A. Sabastian, while the university was represented by Sri N.K. Ramesh. The court noted that the subject matter of this petition was substantially similar to a cognate writ petition, WP No.6735/2020 (Dr. Afsal K.M. v. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science and Another), which had been disposed of by this court on 01.06.2020. The learned panel counsel for the respondent-university rightly contended this similarity. The court found no special circumstances warranting a different view and accordingly disposed of the writ petition in terms of the said judgment. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Examination Evaluation - Third Evaluation of Answer Scripts - Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences - Notification dated 29.03.2019 - Petitioner sought third evaluation of three answer scripts under the multiple valuation notification - Court found subject matter substantially similar to earlier WP No.6735/2020 disposed on 01.06.2020 - Held that in absence of special circumstances, the petition is disposed in terms of the earlier judgment (Para 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a third evaluation of his answer scripts for three subjects under the notification governing multiple valuation dated 29.03.2019.
Final Decision
Writ petition disposed off in terms of the judgment in WP No.6735/2020 dated 01.06.2020, with no costs.
Law Points
- Multiple valuation of answer scripts
- third evaluation
- similarity of subject matter
- disposal in terms of earlier judgment
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 189
Writ Petition No.7955 of 2020 (EDN-RES)
Sri M.A. Sabastian (for petitioner), Sri N.K. Ramesh (for respondents 1 & 2)
Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences, The Registrar Evaluations, City College of Physiotherapy
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking direction for third evaluation of answer scripts in university examination.
Remedy Sought
Direction to respondents to conduct third evaluation of three answer scripts under the notification governing multiple valuation dated 29.03.2019.
Filing Reason
Petitioner sought third evaluation of his answer scripts for three subjects, claiming entitlement under the multiple valuation notification.
Previous Decisions
A cognate writ petition WP No.6735/2020 (Dr. Afsal K.M. v. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science and Another) was disposed of on 01.06.2020.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a third evaluation of his answer scripts under the notification governing multiple valuation dated 29.03.2019.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he is entitled to third evaluation under the notification.
Respondent-university contended that the subject matter is similar to WP No.6735/2020 which was already disposed.
Ratio Decidendi
Where the subject matter of a writ petition is substantially similar to an earlier disposed petition, and no special circumstances warrant a different view, the petition may be disposed in terms of the earlier judgment.
Judgment Excerpts
The subject matter of this writ petition is substantially similar to the one in cognate WP.No.6735/2020 (EDN-RES), Dr. Afsal K.M v/s Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science and Another, disposed off by this Court vide judgment dated 01.06.2020, as rightly contended by the learned Panel Counsel for the respondent-university.
Therefore, this writ petition is also disposed off in terms of said judgment, there being no special circumstances that warrant a different view.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed on an unspecified date, came up for preliminary hearing in 'B' group through video conference on 10.07.2020, and was disposed on the same day.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
