9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Executive Council to cancel the result of re-verification of answer scripts and asking 294 students, who were declared passed on re-verification of answer scripts to reappear in examination of first year MBBS, is upheld. 3. The appellants, who are students, joined first year MBBS course for the academic year 2006-07 in different private medical colleges which are affiliated to the University, Vijaywada. They appeared in the first year M.B.B.S. examination held from September 5, 2006 to October 10, 2006. The results of the examination were declared on December 2, 2006. The record shows that in all 4076 students had appeared in examination out of whom 992 students were declared failed in different papers. In the results published by the university, it was specifically mentioned that such of those students who wanted to attend personal identification for re-totalling of their theory answer scripts should submit their applications on or before December 13, 2006. This personal identification was meant to enable the students to apply for re-totalling of their answer scripts. Out of the 992 students who had failed, 436 students applied for re-totalling of their respective an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Executive Council of the University for appropriate action. A meeting of the Executive Council of the University was convened to consider the action of re-totalling and re-verification of answer scripts relating to First Year M.B.B.S. examination held in September/October, 2006. The Executive Council resolved to ask the Government of Andhra Pradesh to constitute a high level committee to go into the circumstances under which re-verification of answer sheets was undertaken and find out whether any irregularities had taken place. The Executive Council further resolved to withhold declaration of the revised results of First Year M.B.B.S. course till the enquiry report was submitted and give intimation of the same to the Principals of medical colleges concerned. Accordingly, by letter dated February 2, 2007 the Principals of medical colleges were informed not to give effect to the results obtained on re-verification of answer scripts of First Year M.B.B.S. examination. In pursuance to the resolution of Executive Council, the University twice requested the Andhra Pradesh Government to constitute a high level committee but the Government did not oblige the University. Meanwhile, pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ouncil was not justified in cancelling the whole process of re-valuation, which was undertaken pursuant to the order of the Vice-Chancellor nor the Executive Council was justified in asking the students to re-appear in first year MBBS examination, which was scheduled to be held on April 25, 2007. Therefore, they invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution by filing Writ Petition No. 8658 of 2007 and other batch of petitions. 5. The learned single Judge of the High Court was of the opinion that the Vice-Chancellor had power under Section 12(2) of the Act, to appoint committee for re-verification of the answer scripts of the students and in the absence of any express power conferred on the Executive Council or the Academic Council, the Executive Council was not justified in cancelling the whole process undertaken for re-verification at the behest of the Vice-Chancellor. In view of above mentioned findings, the learned single Judge allowed the writ petitions filed by the students vide judgment dated May 1,2007. 6. Feeling aggrieved, the Registrar of the University filed Writ Appeal No. 402 of 2007 and other cognate appeals. The Divi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on whether the action taken for the re-verification of the answer scripts by the Vice-Chancellor of the University was valid. The Vice-chancellor agreed before the Executive Council that he had ordered re-verification under pressure and coercion from the students and their parents. Having regard to the facts of the case, the Executive Council did not approve the action of the Vice-Chancellor directing re-verification of the answer scripts and cancelled the whole process of re-verification. The Executive Council was further of the opinion that opportunity should be given to the failed students to re-appear in examination and, therefore, it directed the students, who had failed, to reappear in the first year MBBS examination, which was scheduled to be held on April 25, 2007. 8. The Division Bench of the High Court has set aside the judgment of the learned single Judge on the ground that the Vice-chancellor of the University had no power to order re-verification of the answer scripts. Section 12(2) of the Act reads as under: The Vice-Chancellor shall be the Principal executive and academic officer of the University and shall exercise general supervision and control over the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12(2) and 12(3) is indeed significant. If the Vice-Chancellor ' believes that a situation calls for immediate action, he can take such action as he thinks necessary though in the normal course he is not competent to take that action. However, he must report to the concerned authority or body, who would, in the ordinary course, have dealt with the matter. That is not all. His pivotal position as the principal executive officer also carries with him certain implied powers. It is the magisterial power which is plainly to be inferred. This power is essential for him to maintain domestic discipline in the academic and non-academic affairs. In a wide variety of situations in the relationship of tutor and pupil he has to act firmly and promptly to put down indiscipline and malpractice. As per the Statutes of university, the Vice-Chancellor is whole-time Officer of the university and by virtue of his office, is a Member and Chairman of the Executive Council and of the Academic Council. He has power to convene meetings of the Executive Council and the Academic Council. The plea that there is absence of specific provision enabling the Vice-Chancellor to order re-evaluation of the answ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the High Court, though observed that the writ petitioner who had taken the examination was hardly a competent person to assess his own merit and on that basis claim re-evaluation of papers, but issued the aforesaid direction in order to eliminate the possibility of injustice on account of marginal variation in the marks. It was admitted before the Supreme Court that the regulation of the Board of Secondary education, Orissa did not make any provision of re-evaluation of answer books of the students. The Supreme Court was of the opinion that the question whether in absence of any provision to that effect an examinee is entitled to ask for re-evaluation of his answer books was examined by the Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman, Bihar Public Service AIR2004SC4116 . It was noticed by the Supreme Court that in the said decision it was held that in absence of rules providing for re-evaluation of answer books no direction should be issued because a direction for re-evaluation of the answer books would throw many problems and in the larger public interest such a direction must be avoided. Therefore, the Supreme Court expressed the opinion that the order of the High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... totalling of their marks recorded on the answer scripts. From the record, it is evident that the University authorities including the Vice-Chancellor, did not at all go into the merits of the allegations made in the complaints/representations submitted by the parent's association for re-verification to find out whether there was any grain of truth in them. The record produced by the University does not give any indication of methodology adopted by the Committee for re-valuation. Moreover, the Members of the Committee appointed by the Vice-Chancellor for re-valuation of answer scripts had undertaken re-verification of 1082 answer scripts and completed re-verification in two days which itself indicates that the said re-valuation was not properly done and no credence could be given to the same. It is worth noticing that the decision of the Executive Council to cancel the result of the students on the basis of re-verification and giving an opportunity to the failed students to re-appear in the first year MBBS examination was approved by the Vice-Chancellor himself. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in upholding the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
