DIVYA GULATI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner, who prosecutes her MBBS in Apollo Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Hyderabad, filed the instant writ petition seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in evaluating her Final Year MBBS Part-II examination in the subject of Surgery (Theory) held in January/February, 2020 without following the earlier orders of this High Court and declaring the result as 'failed' in the subject of Surgery (Theory + Oral) as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to get her answer scripts in the subject of Surgery (Theory) of Final Year Part-II re-evaluated by strictly following the directions given by this court in earlier judgments.

(2.) The petitioner's case succinctly is thus. The petitioner appeared for Final MBBS Part-II examination (Hall Ticket No.15079027) conducted by the 2nd respondent in the month of January/February, 2020. The results were announced and she came to know that she was failed in one subject Surgery (Theory + Oral) wherein she secured 64 marks out of the minimum required 70 marks. She immediately approached the 2nd respondent University and applied for re-totalling of the said subject in March, 2020. On 30.05.2020 on verifying the official website of the 2nd respondent University, she found her status after re-totalling as 'No Change'. The petitioner claims that she is a brilliant student and in all the academic years she secured good marks and there was no reason that she should fail in the final year. She suspects that mistakes might have crept in while digitally evaluating her answer sheet in the subject i.e., Surgery (Theory). She narrated certain instances of how mistakes might have taken place. It is stated that as per the University norms, answer sheets are evaluated digitally. The service provider is authorized to decode, scan and upload the answer sheets on the computer to transfer them to the respective examiners for correction. In the process, if the server was down all the answer sheets might not have been uploaded correctly and some of them might be missing. The service provider does not take meticulous care to see whether all the papers have been uploaded or not.

(3.) The 2nd respondent filed counter denying the material averments and inter alia contending thus.