ROHINI DATTATRAYA TARE Vs. NAGPUR UNIVERSITYNAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three ewrrilt petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution can be conveniently diiiiiiiisposed of by common judgment since the points involved are the same. In all these petitions. The petitioners have pravedd for a declaration that the result of the revaluation of their papers in the examination held in summer 1982 is null and void and also for quashing certain resolutions of the AcademicCouncil and the Executive Council as being illegal land ultra vires S. 64. Nagpur University Act. 1974.

(2.) The facts are few and not in dispute. The three petitioners appeared for the examinations held in or about April 1982. The petitioner in Write Petition No. 498 of 1983. Miss Part-I examination in sanskrit. She was placed First Class First as she secured the highest number of marks in aggregate. In one of the papepers namely. Paper I on Vedic Linguistics Etymology. She was declared to have secured only 36 marks. As she was not satisfieid with theassessment of her performance in the said subject. She applied to the University for revaluation of the said paper in accordance with the rules prescribed by the University. In due course she was informed that on revaluation she was found to have secured only 16 marks in the said paper. Reduction of marks in the said paper. Though even with this reduction of marks shecontinued to top the list of successful candidates.

(3.) The petitioner in Write Petitiono No. 502 of 1983. Miss Hema Deshpande appeared for M.Sc. Part-I examination. As in First Class. In two of the papers namely. Papers II on Environmental Micro Biology. She had dsecured only 45 and 42 out of 75 marks. As she was not satisfied about valuation of marks from the University which showed that after the revaluation she was found to have receilved 32 and 29 marks respectively in the said papers. This resulting in a fall of 13 marks in both the papers.