KU RUCHIRA GUHA Vs. PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for declaration of Rule 3. 9. 2 of M. P. Medical and Dental Graduate Entrance Rules, 2003 as ultra vires and further to award the marks for the right answers as stated by the petitioner. Quite apart from the above a prayer has been made to produce the relevant records of the petitioner relating to Pre-Medical Test Examination, 2003 and grant such reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) IT is pertinent to state here that in the relief clause the prayer has been erroneously couched to strike down the Rule 3. 9. 2 but Mr. Jagdish Tiwari has fairly submitted that it should be 3. 9. 3. Accordingly we shall deal with the said Rule.

(3.) THE expose of facts is that the petitioner appeared in the Pre-Medical Test held in the year 2003 conducted by the Professional Examination Board. The petitioner was placed at serial No. 109 in the waiting list. The mark-sheet of the petitioner has been brought on record as Annexure P-1. It is urged in the petition that the petitioner has been awarded less marks because of the faulty and erroneous valuation. It is stated that the petitioner applied for revaluation of the marks in two subjects and endeavoured hard to satisfy the authority of the Examination Board to rectify the error but it was an exercise in futility. Many an averment has been made with regard to incorrect valuation and how answers get support from the text-books. Number of references have been made to the questions to justify the aforesaid stand. An example has been given that State of Karnataka supplies copy of questions and their answers to avoid any kind of fallacy in declaration of the result. As has been indicated hereinbefore apart from the criticism advanced with regard to the erroneous valuation Rule 9. 3 has been assailed on the Constitutional backdrop.