LexTHE REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORE versus G. HEMLATHA AND OTHERS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 8 S.C.R. 157 THE REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF A HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORE v. G. HEMLATHA AND OTHERS. (Civil Appeal No. 5992 of 2012) AUGUST 23, 2012 B [A.K. PATNAIK AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.] Education - PG course - Admission - Qualifying examination - Eligibility criteria - Whether can be relaxed by C rounding-off the marks - Held: Eligibility criteria should be strictly adhered to, when rounding-off is not permitted by any statute or rules - On facts, High Court erred in rounding-off the marks so as to make the candidate eligible for admission to PG course - However, clarified that since the candidate D already completed the course, the judgment not to have adverse impact on the candidate. The question for consideration in the present appeal was whether by applying the principle of rounding-off, the E eligibility criteria prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the PG Course in M.Sc. (Nursing) could be relaxed. Disposing of the appeal, the Court F HELD: No provision of any statute or any rules framed thereunder has been shown which permits rounding-off of eligibility criteria prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the PG course in M.SC (Nursing). When eligibility criteria is prescribed in G a qualifying examination, it must be strictly adhered to. Any dilution or tampering with it will work injustice on other candidates. The Division Bench of the High Court erred in holding that Single Judge was right in rounding- 157 H 158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 8 S.C.R. A off of 54.71 % to 55% so as to make respondent No. 1 eligible for admission to PG course. Such rounding-off is impermissible. It is clarified that this order merely settles the question of law and shall not have any adverse impact, in any manner, on the service of respondent No. B 1, as she has completed the course. [Paras 3, 10 and 11] [159-C; 162-E-G] c D E Orissa Public Service Commission and Anr. v. Rupashree Chowdhary and Anr. (2011) 8 SCC 108: 2011 (9) SCR 748 - relied on. Vani Pali Tripathi vs. Director General, Medical Education andTraining and Ors. AIR 2003 All 164; Ku/dip Singh, Legal Assistant,Punjab Financial Corporation vs. The State of Punjab and Ors. (1997) 117 PLR 1 - referred to. Case Law Reference: 2011 (9) SCR 748 AIR 2003 All 164 (1997) 117 PLR 1 Relied on Referred to Referred to Para 8 Para 9 Para 9 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5992 of 2012. From the Judgment & Order dated 28.10.2010 of the High F Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Gulbarga in Writ Appeal No. 10223 of 2010(EDN-ADM). S.N. Bhat for the Appellant. G Sharan Gounda Patil, Ashok Kumar Gupta II for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by (SMT.) RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. 1. Leave H granted. REG, RAJIV GANDHI UNI. OF HEALTH SCI., BANGALORE v. 159 G HEMLATHA[RANJANAPRAKASH DESAI, J.] 2. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the A judgment dated 28.10.2010 of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. By the impugned judgment, the Division Bench declined to entertain the appeal filed by the appellant challenging the judgment of learned Single Judge of the High Court permitting rounding-off of the percentage of marks B obtained by respondent 1 so as to make her eligible to get admission to post-graduate course ["PG course", for convenience] in M.Sc (Nursing). 3. On 11.03.2011 this Court issued notice only to settle the question of law raised in the appeal because respondent 1 has C completed the course. This court refused to stay the impugned order and directed that respondent 1 's admission be regularized and her results be declared. 4. The question of law involved in this case is whether by applying the principle of rounding-off the eligibility criteria D prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the PG course in M.Sc (Nursing) can be relaxed. 5. For deciding the question of law, it is necessary to know the facts of the case. Respondent 1 completed Bachelor of E Science degree in Nursing with 54.71% aggregate marks from N.T.R. University of Health Sciences in the year 1997. Thereafter, she registered herself as a Public Health Nurse and Midwife. She also registered herself as a nurse under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Nurses and Midwives (Extension of Amendment) Act, 1964. She was appointed as F a working staff nurse at th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.