G MEENA Vs. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS O U

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, B.Sc., III Year student studying in respondent-University, filed this Writ Petition questioning the inaction on the part of the respondent-University in not communicating the result of the revaluation of her paper for which she paid the required fee.

(2.) By order dated 27-8-1999 I directed the petitioner to pay Rs.5,000/- by way of Demand Draft in favour of Registrar, Osmania University and also directed the University to produce papers for inspection by the Court. Thereafter, the petitioner received one rubber-stamped postcard 'there is no change in the revaluation results'. The procedure adopted by the University is unknown to law and the same is deprecated by this Court. After production of the papers, this Court having seen that the marks shown in the Memorandum of marks are not tallying with the marks that are given to the questions in the answer papers and having noticed that some of the answers were not awarded marks, by order dated 6-9-1999 directed the Vice-Chancellor to get the papers revalued by another Valuation Officer and to produce the same before the Court. As per the marks list produced by the University, after revaluation in pursuance of the directions of this Court, it is seen that in Mathematics paper the petitioner got 26 marks i.e., less than 4 marks as per the marks awarded in the answer script and 9 marks as per the Memorandum of marks and in Physics paper she was awarded 61 marks i.e., 3 marks more than the marks shown in answer script as well as Memorandum of marks.

(3.) The respondents' Counsel submits that as the University has added 5 grace marks to all the students, the marks of the petitioner were shown as 35 in Maths paper.