Jugesh Kumar Sahu v. Sant Gahira Guru Vishwavidyalaya (Formerly Known As Surguja University)

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 875 of 2020 Jugesh Kumar Sahu Son Of Shivshanker Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Dabaripara, Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Sant Gahira Guru Vishwavidyalaya (formerly known as Surguja University) Surguja Ambikapur, Through It's Registrar, Sant Gahira Guru Vishwavidyalaya, Surguja Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

2. Registrar, Sant Gahira Guru Vishwavidyalaya, Surguja Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

3. Examination Controller, Sant Gahira Guru Vishwavidyalaya, Surguja Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents ________________________________________________________ For petitioner - Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 02/08/2021 1.

Despite notice no representation is made on behalf of the respondents.

2.

Grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner who is a handicapped person appeared in the B.Ed. second year examination in the year 2019. Out of 6 theory papers, paper number 4 pertains to assessment for learning wherein the petitioner attempted all the five questions but when the result were declared he was shocked to notice that he was only awarded six marks in the said paper out of total 40 marks despite the fact he attempted all the questions, therefore the petitioner applied for revaluation but there was no change and consequently the petitioner applied for copy of the answer sheet under the RTI. After receiving the copy of the answer sheet the petitioner came to know that two questions attempted by him were not checked and in one question answer though marks were awarded but the same was not included in the tabulation sheet, therefore the petitioner immediately

approached the university and made request for re-checking the papers and to evaluate all the answer sheets. Consequently he moved a representation dated 20/11/2019 by Annexure P-5. It is contended that the said representation may be directed to be decided and revaluation and proper checking of the answer may be done.

3.

There is no representation is made on behalf of the respondents. Considering the limited part representation and the reply which is received by the petitioner under the RTI, the respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of 45 days and thereafter if the revaluation is allowed to be done and petitioner's marks is enhanced by re-checking his mark sheet may accordingly be amended and issued. 4.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri