UNIVERSITY OF JAMMU Vs. JYOTIKA BHASIN
LAWS(J&K)-1999-8-13
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on August 09,1999

UNIVERSITY OF JAMMU Appellant
VERSUS
Jyotika Bhasin Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE respondent writ petitioner on re -evaluation was found to have obtained 1169 marks in the discipline of M.Com examination. This examination was conducted by the appellant University. On the basis of this re -evaluation she was held entitled to be placed at S. No. 1 in the merit list. She was also held entitled to claim a Gold Medal. She came to be placed above respondent No. 2. It is this relief granted by the learned Single Judge of this court in the writ petition preferred by respondent no. 1 which is subject matter of challenge in this appeal.
(2.) THE course in question in which respondent no. 1 and respondent no. 2 appeared commenced in the year 1985. This was 1985 -87 session. This consisted of four semesters Respondent no. 1 writ petitioner appeared in the final semester of M.Com with other classmates in the month of September, 1987. The result of this was declared on 27.12.1987. Respondents no. 2 get 1163 marks whereas respondent no. 1 writ petitioner get 1160 marks. Further, fact is that respondent writ petitioner was shown in the category of reappear in course no. 504 of 3rd semester. This examination was held in Feb. 1987. As a re -appear candidate she appeared in October 1987. Before this she had appeared in 4th semester examination in August, 1987. The result of the 4th semester was declared on 20.12.1987. The petitioner respondent no. ls result of the course 504 re -appear category of examination taken by her in October 1987 was declared on 30.1.1988. On 30.1.1938 the mark position of respondent no. 1 writ petitioner and respondent no. 2 who figured as respondent no. 4 in the writ petition was as under: 1) Respondent no./ writ petitioner = 1160 marks 2) Respondent no. 2 (respondent no.4 in the writ petition) =1163 marks.
(3.) THE petitioner/ respondent writ petitioner applied for revaluation. In this revaluation for course no. 504 the respondent writ petitioner was held entitled to four more marks. With regard to re -valuation of course no. 580 and 562 the respondent writ petitioner was held entitled to extra 3 and 2 marks. In this way if 9 marks were added then the writ petitioners total marks would have been 1169. She should have come above to respondent no. 1. This was however not done. She filed a petition in this court. The factual position was taken note of by a learned Single Judge of this court. This was accepted. On this basis respondent writ petitioner was held to be placed above respondent no. 2 She was also held entitled to Gold Medal. She was placed at S. No. 1 in the merit list. This is what is being challenged in this appeal. The learned counsel for the University submits that the respondent writ petitioner was not entitled to a Gold Medal. It is submitted that the Gold Medal can be allowed only to a candidate who clears the examination within the prescribed period of two academic years consisting of four semesters. It is further stated that the Academic year commenced in the year 1985 and it concluded in August 1987. As the respondent writ petitioner did not clear the examination within the academic year therefore, she is not entitled to a Gold Medal. With regard to her claim for being placed at S. No. 1 in the merit list, it is urged that even this relief cannot be granted. It is submitted that the relief could only be granted if the impact of re -valuation would change the character of the result. The character of the result means from "Fall" to "Reappear" or "Compartment" or "Re -appear" to "Compartment" or "pass". Change in division or position in the University merit list or where on re -valuation the figure or score increased or decreases by 8% or more marks allotted to the concerned paper. It is only in these circumstances the change is to be given effect to. The relevant statues on which the reliance is being placed on are statues 10, 36 and 41. These are being reproduced below: "10. The effect of revaluation shall be given where the character of the result changes. The character means fail to re -appear or compartment, re -appear to compartment or pass or vice versa, change in division or position in the University merit list or where on revaluation the score increases or decreases by 8% or more of maximum marks allotted to the concerned paper". 36. A candidate who does not pass MA, M.Sc., M.Com programme within the prescribed period of two academic years consisting of 4 semesters shall not be entitled to scholarship or prize or a medal". "41. Unless otherwise provided in the statutes or regulations. "Academic year" wherever mentioned shall mean the period from the date of commencement of formation of a class till the date of commencement of the annual examination held for the class". ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.