Skip to content


Alok Kumar Mishra Vs. Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Alok Kumar Mishra

Respondent

Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya

Excerpt:


writ petition no.6923/2012 12.3.2013 shri r.n.mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri shiv kumar shrivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.1. heard on admission. the petitioner is a visually handicapped person. he appeared in the m.a.final year examination in the month of april 2011 as a private student of rani durgavati vishwavidyalaya. he was awarded 47 out of 100 marks in modern history of india (1958 to 1964) subject. likewise he was awarded 36 out of 100 marks in ancient society subject. since the petitioner was dissatisfied with the marks awarded to him on these subjects he applied for revaluation but even on revaluation no change in the marks has been reported. according to the petitioner his answer books of the above subjects have not been properly valued and, therefore, second revaluation of the answer books be ordered by this court. the petitioner, however, could not point out any provision which provides for such a second revaluation of the answer books. in the absence of any provision no direction as prayed for can be issued. the petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed summarily. judge ss

Judgment:


Writ Petition No.6923/2012 12.3.2013 Shri R.N.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.1.

Heard on admission.

The petitioner is a visually handicapped person.

He appeared in the M.A.final year examination in the month of April 2011 as a private student of Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya.

He was awarded 47 out of 100 marks in Modern History of India (1958 to 1964) subject.

Likewise he was awarded 36 out of 100 marks in Ancient Society subject.

Since the petitioner was dissatisfied with the marks awarded to him on these subjects he applied for revaluation but even on revaluation no change in the marks has been reported.

According to the petitioner his answer books of the above subjects have not been properly valued and, therefore, second revaluation of the answer books be ordered by this Court.

The petitioner, however, could not point out any provision which provides for such a second revaluation of the answer books.

In the absence of any provision no direction as prayed for can be issued.

The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed summarily.

JUDGE ss


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //