M.M. Sundresh JUDGMENT
M.R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 31.10.2019 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amravati in Writ Appeal Nos. 363 & 364 of 2019, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said writ appeals and has confirmed the common judgment and order dated 19.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 10376/2019 and 9486/2019 ordering/directing the re-evaluation of the answer scripts of the respective original writ Petitioners who appeared in post-graduation in diploma course in the NTR University of Health Sciences (Appellant herein), the University has preferred the present appeals.
2. That the original writ Petitioners appeared in post-graduation diploma course conducted by the Appellant - University. There was a digital evaluation of the answer scripts. In the first round of litigation, certain directions were issued by the learned Single Judge how to evaluate the answer scripts. The respective students - original writ Petitioners were not satisfied with the evaluation of the answer scripts and therefore they filed writ petitions before the learned Single Judge praying for re-evaluation of their answer scripts, which were evaluated digitally.
2.1. The learned Single Judge called for the record and after perusing the record, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the evaluation of the answer scripts was not in line with the directions issued by the learned Single Judge issued in the earlier round of litigation and that there was no proper evaluation of the answer scripts. By observing so, the learned Single Judge ordered re-evaluation of the answer scripts afresh as per the prevalent MCI norms by identifying four fresh examiners. While allowing the writ petitions, the learned Single Judge directed/ordered as under:
Hence, the writ petition is allowed. The Respondents are directed to get the Petitioners' answer scripts once again evaluation as per the prevalent MCI norms by identifying four fresh examiners. They are also directed to give clear and categorical instructions to the said new set of examiners to physically put the marks etc. on the uploaded answer script. The identified Globerana Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad should be directed to teach the examiner, the manner of evaluating the digital/upload answer sheet (if necessary). The corrected sheet must be preserved for future review and in order to seek whether the examiner has applied his mind while evaluating the answer scripts or not. The entire exercise should be completed within a period of six weeks from today.
2.2. The common judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge was the subject matter of writ appeals before the Division Bench. Before the Division Bench, it was specifically contended on behalf of the Appellant - University that as there was no provision for re-evaluation and therefore in absence of having any such provision, the learned Single Judge was not justified in ordering re-evaluation. It was submitted that though the said plea was specifically taken before the learned Single Judge, the learned Single Judge did not address on the said objection. That by the impugned common judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the writ appeals preferred by the University. Hence, the present appeals.........