(1.) THE review petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 681 of 2012 challenging the rank list dated April, 2004 for the candidates for whom ranking was held during the said month and consequently, sought for a direction to the first respondent to prepare a fresh ranking list. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge by an elaborate order. Challenging the said order passed, the petitioner filed writ appeal in W.A. No. 1066 of 2014. The said writ appeal was dismissed by us by order dated 20.08.2014 in the following manner.
(2.) TWO submissions have been made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The first submission is that the reason given by this Court in the writ appeal that the appellant was aware of the rank list, is factually incorrect. The second submission is that it is for the respondents to convince the Court that the second respondent has not failed in one subject in view of the specific assertion made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner.
(3.) I respectfully state that as the petitioner and the 2nd respondent were classmates, he knew that the 2nd respondent did not pass all the 8 semester examinations in first attempt and hence, the petitioner expected that he would be given 3rd ranking in the University Rank list. But, the 1st respondent conferred the 3rd rank to 2nd respondent ignoring the petitioner."