K.R. SRINIVAS versus R.M. PREMCHAND AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 114 · Decided: 30-09-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. PUNCHHI, K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
K.R. SRINIVAS 
v. 
R.M. PREMCHAND AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 30, 1994 
[MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI AND 
K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, JJ.] 
University-Examination-Revaluation of answer sheets-Son of Vice-
Chancel/or seeking revaluation-Award of higher marks-Allegation of 
C manipulation becau~e of father's interes~estrnction of answer sheets as per 
university regulations-Writ in public interest challenging result after a long 
time and subsequent to destruction of answer sheets held not main-
tainable-Expunction of adverse remarks against Vice- Chancellor ordered. 
The appellant appeared for final examination of Bachelor of Marine 
D Engineering in Andhra University in 1988. During that time his father, 
appellant in the connected appeal, was Vice Chancellor of the University. 
He passed the examination in Second Division but sought revaluation of 
his answer books of three subjects and that brought him substantially 
higher marks as a result of which he was awarded degree with First 
E Division. Under the relevant Regulations of the University the answer 
books were destroyed within six months from the examination. In 1991 the 
respondent, .a Research Scholar of the University, filed. a writ petition in 
public interest in the High Court challenging the appellant's result on the 
ground that neither the University wa~ competent to revaluate the papers 
F 
nor could such result be achieved since there were procedural ir· 
regularities as also that the result had been manipulated because of 
Vice-Chancellor's interest in his son. 
A single judge of the High Court dismissed the petition. On appeal 
a Division Bench held that the appellant's result was manipulated but the 
G degree awarded was not cancelled. The appellant filed an appeal in this 
Court. While disposing the appeal the Division Bench made certain ad-
verse remarks against the appellant's father i.e. the then Vice-Chancellor 
of the University. The connected appeal has been filed by him seeking 
expunction of the remarks. 
H 
Allowing the appeals, this Court 
114 
K.R. SRINN AS v. R.M. PREM CHAND 
115 
HELD : 1. A Writ petitioner who comes to the Court for relief in A 
public interest must come not only with clean bands, like any other writ 
pe~itioner, but must further come with a clean heart, clean mind and a 
clean objective. It cannot be assumed that the respondent who at the 
relevant time was a Research Scholar and part and parcel of the Univer-
sity, did not know the regulations whereunder the answer books are B 
destroyed within six months from the examination under formal orders of 
the functionaries. It cannot be assumed that he did not know about the 
destruction of the answer books at the time when he moved the High Court. 
The respondent had no locus standi to move the High Court in public 
interest at that belated point of time. [117-F, GI 
2. As a sequel all remarks against appellant's father in the judgment 
of the Division Bench of the High Court not only get expunged but the 
whole basis on which they rest stands effaced. [118-B] 
c 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6589 of 
1994 Etc. 
D 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.12.93 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in W.A. No. 53 of 1993. 
P.P. Rao and K. Ram Kumar for the Appellants. 
S. Siva Subramaniam and R.A. Perumal for the Respondent No.1. 
C. Sitaramaha and Ms. Vrinda Dhar for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted in both matters. 
E 
F 
K. R. Srinivas, the appellant in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) 
No. 2828 of 94 is aggrieved against the order of a Division Bench of the 
Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 17.12.1993 passed in Writ Appeal No. 
53 of 1993 whereby the writ petition No. 2082 of 1991, preferred by Dr. G 
R.M. Premchand the first respondent under Article 226 of the Constitu-
tion, was allowed in public interest. Since certain adverse remarks came to 
be made by the Division Bench against the father of K.R. Srinivas i.e., 
Professor K.V. Ramana, the then Vice Chancellor of the Andhra Univer-
sity, the other appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 2392 of 94 seeks the H 
116 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
limited ....................... relief of expunction of all those remarks. 
B 
c 
We are refraining from giving herein the facts elaborately, for we 
have felt a sense of discomfort and uneasiness in which the High Court's 
jurisdiction in public interest was invoked at a point of time when the 
appellant 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.