THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, THE T.N. DR. M.G.R. MEDICAL UNIVERSITY REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, 69, ANNA SALAI, GUINDY, CHENNAI-600 032 Vs. G. FIBI, D/O. N. GURU KUMAR BABU, ELANTHAVILAI, CHALACHAKONOM, KAPPIKADU POST, K.K. DISTRICT-629 162 AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant the Vice-Chancellor of T.N.Dr.M.G.R.Medical University is the 3rd respondent in W.P.(MD).No.8731/2015 filed by the 3rd respondent herein/writ petitioner. This writ appeal has been filed as against the order dated 05.01.2016 in W.P.(MD).No.8731/2015, whereby and wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court has allowed the writ petition filed by the 1st respondent herein, directing the appellant and the official respondents to revalue the 1st respondent's answer sheet in clinical examination ie., Paper-IV (Special Medicine namely Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Verma) of the third professional examination held on 10.03.2015 at A.T.S.V.S. Siddha Medical College, Munchirai, Kanyakumari District.

(2.) The case of the 1st respondent herein/writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge is as follows- 2.1. She had joined the Bachelor of Siddha Medicine and Surgery Course in T.S.V.S. Sidda Medical College Munchirail, Kanayakumari District and the said college is affiliated to the appellant-University. The 1st respondent herein joined the said course commencing from the year 2009 and the duration of the said course is 5 1/2 years, including one year of compulsory Rotatory Resident Intership (House Surgeon). The said Course is conducted in three professionals and the duration of each professional is 18 months. Thus, the total period for all three Professionals is 4 1/2 years, with one year Compulsory Rotatory Resident Internship; thus, the said course is completed by a student in 5 1/2 years. There are six papers and one language paper for the first professional. In second professional, there are seven papers. The third/final Professional has six papers, including one paper for special medicine. The said Special Medicine is "Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Varma". 2.2. The 1st respondent/writ petitioner appeared for the 1st professional examination in Feb. 2012 and obtained 81.7% of marks in aggregate. In the second professional examination held during Aug. 2013, she secured 75% of marks in aggregate. Thus, right from the beginning of the course, her performance was consistently excellent and in the above two professional examinations, she got the first mark in the college. She expected very good marks in all the papers in the 3rd professional also, including practical and clinical and she hoped to come 1st in the college. 2.3. It is the further case of the 1st respondent herein/writ petitioner that the 5th respondent viz., Dr. R. Iyankannu, Reader, A.T.S.V.S. Siddha Medical College, Munichirai, Kanayakumari Dist, who took classes for the 1st respondent for the special medicine paper viz.'Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Varma', frequently asked the 1st respondent to prepare notes for a book which he proposed to publish; likewise, he made his request to some other students also. The 1st respondent wrote about 15 pages for him first and handed over to him. But, not being satisfied with that, he continued to press the 1st respondent to write more and more notes for his book; but, the 1st respondent refused to do the said work as it greatly affected her studies. Due to her refusal to write notes for him, he had a grudge against the writ petitioner. 2.4. While so, the writ petitioner appeared for the 3rd professional examinations in Feb-2015 and she wrote all the six papers including the practical and clinical examinations very well as usual and she expected to get the first marks in the 3rd professional also. When the results were declared for the 3rd Professional on 31.03.2015, to her shock and surprise, she found that she has failed in clinical examination in special medicine paper namely "Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Varma" and thereby, failed in the 3rd professional examination, as a result of which, again she has to appear for theory, practical and clinical examinations once again to clear as arrear to obtain the degree. According to the 1st respondent, she secured 78.6%, 71% and 78.6% in clinical examinations in other three papers and only in the Paper IV - Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Verma, in clinical examination, she has been awarded 26 marks out of 70, to maker her fail for want of 9 marks as the minimum marks for pass is 35. 2.5. It is further stated by the 1st respondent that in the clinical examination, a candidate investigates the patients for signs of disease, identifies the disease and prescribes medicine with correct dosage for the disease. The clinical examination contains 2 parts, one long case and one short case. Out of total 70 marks allotted for clinical examination, 50 marks are assigned for long case and 20 marks for short case. A candidate must obtain 35 marks out of 70 to pass clinical examination. The clinical examination is followed by an oral test. The oral test is mostly on the basis of the performance of the candidates in clinical examination. Generally, if a candidate does not fare well or fails in the clinical examination, the Examiners inform the candidate at the time of oral about the candidate's poor performance. So far as the 1st respondent's case is concerned, the oral test was conducted normally as if her performance in clinical had been normal and she was not given any information so as to convey that her performance in the clinical was poor. She also performed well in the oral test. Under such circumstance, she expected to secure more than 70% of marks in the clinical and was waiting for her results. But, the petitioner was declared as failed in the clinical examination. It is the case of the petitioner that by developing grudge against the petitioner, the 5th respondent has awarded lesser marks to the 1st respondent so as to fail her in the clinical examination. Further, the internal marks were independently awarded by the 5th respondent. Hence, she has filed the writ petition for a mandamus, directing the concerned authorities to revalue her answer sheets in the clinical examination i.e, Paper-IV, Special Medicine namely 'Sirappu Maruthuvam including Yoga and Varma' in the 3rd professional examination held on 10.03.2015 at A.T.S.V.S. Siddha Medical College, Munchirai, Kanyakumari District, with the support of her case sheets submitted at the time of clinical examination and patient's ward case sheets, and to declare the revised result.

(3.) The writ petition was opposed by the appellant herein/R3 viz., The Vice-Chancellor, Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, by filing a detailed counter. The crux of the contentions of the appellant is that there is no provision for revaluation in the Regulation of Central Council of Indian Medicine as well as in the Regulations of the T.N. Dr. M.G.R. Medical University; hence, the request of the writ petitioner/R1 cannot be entertained.