FATEH KUMARI SISODIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had applied for M.A. Hindi Examination a Two Years Course of Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur (hereinafter called 'the University'). She appeared in M.A. (Previous) Examination under Roll No. 92019 and secured first position by obtaining 251 marks out of 400 marks. After clearing the M.A. (Previous) Examination she appeared in the M.A. (Final) Examination, the result of which was declared on 14-3-1993 and in the result so declared, it was shown that she had secured 226 marks out of 400 marks in the M.A. (Final) Examination and, thus, the total marks in the M.A. (Previous) and M.A. (Final) Examinations came to 477 marks out of 800 marks. It is stated by the petitioner that in one of the subjects in the M.A. (Final) Examination i.e. 'Hindi Natya Evam Ranga- manch' in the result sheet it is shown that she had secured 40 marks out of 100 marks. She had apprehension that by way of inadvertence or otherwise or by way of mistake the totalling and computation of marks had not been done properly and, therefore, she applied for re-evaluation of her answer-book of the said subject. The University had initially informed her that there was no change in the marks obtained by her in the said subject but later on immediately she was informed that on re-checking of totalling and re-evaluation there is a total increase of 11 marks in the said subject i.e. she had obtained 51 marks out of 100 marks and, thus, the total of the marks obtained by her in the M.A. (Previous) and M.A. (Final) Examinations had come out to be 488 out of 800 marks. Earlier at the declaration of the result when she is said to have obtained 477 marks she was placed at second position in the merit list and student having obtained a higher aggregate of 487 marks was said to be the first position holder. After re-totalling and re-evaluation (remarking) the aggregate marks of the petitioner became higher to the student who had obtained the first position. Therefore, the petitioner approached the University to correct the position list and merit and also to award her the Gold Medal, which is normally given to the student who stands first in the examination. She was informed that because of certain instructions, if the marks are increased because of re-evaluation then in that situation she cannot be given the first position, despite the fact that she stands higher than the student who has got the first position. Aggrieved by the communication dated 9-6-1994, the petitioner had filed the present writ petition on the ground that her total aggregate marks comes to 488 out of 800 marks and the student lower in merit i.e. 487 marks out of 800 has been awarded the Gold Medal.

(2.) A written-statement has been filed by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and the position as stated above is not denied. It is admitted by the University that there was a mistake in the totalling of such subject and instead of 48 marks by mistake 40 marks had been mentioned in the details of the marks and, therefore, her marks were increased by way of removing the mistake in the total by 8 marks. It was further admitted that the total marks after re-evaluation in such subject had come to 51 i.e. 40 marks initially awarded to the petitioner were raised to 48 marks by correcting the wrong totalling and on reevaluation the total marks were raised to 51.

(3.) A contention has been raised that the University had issued certain instructions wherein it has been provided that the candidate shall not be eligible for award of Gold Medal consequent upon the revision in his/ her result, due to re-evaluation/improvement. As per the written statement of the University, the petitioner after re-totalling and after correcting the total in that subject had obtained aggregate of 485 marks and if 3 marks after re-evaluation are also added then the position of the petitioner goes higher to the student who was awarded the Gold Medal.