SHARDULSAB Vs. KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, party-in-person, is a Law Student. He had filed this writ petition with the following prayers:

(2.) PRAYER (b) consists of two parts. The first portion seeks setting aside Annexures-D and F while the second portion seeks declaration that petitioner has passed (i) Law of Crimes, (ii) Property Law, (iii) Hindu Law and (iv) Public International Law. Subsequent to filing of the writ petition, the petitioner has passed three subjects except Law of Crimes.

(3.) IN so far as Law of Crimes is concerned, Learned Counsel for the first respondent University submits that petitioner applied for re-valuation and accordingly re-valuation was done by one of the Professor of National Law School of India but still petitioner has failed. This Court cannot say that the marks allotted in the re-valuation is either less or not correct/when a Professor of pioneer University has re-valuated the answer script of the petitioner, petitioner cannot have any grievance. Mr. V. B. Ganachari, Learned Counsel for the respondents has rightly relied upon the decision reported in Sudha M. S. Vs. State Of Karnataka 1985 (1) Kar. L. J. 61 wherein it is held at paragraphs 14 and 17 as hereunder: