Supriya Rani v. University Of Delhi & ORS

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8499/2015 & C.M. No.30426/2016 SUPRIYA RANI ..... Petitioner Through Petitioner in person.

versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Ankur Chhibber and Mr. Bhanu Gupta, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 17.11.2017 The prayers made in the present petition have been perused. Learned counsel for the respondent at the outset points out that the prayers made in the present petition are adequately answered by the two Single Benches of this Court in WP(C) 3446/2016 Mohit Kumar Gupta & Anr. Vs. University of Delhi & Ors. and in WP(C) 1873/2016 University of Delhi Vs. Abner Ingty. This Court notes the submission and endroses it. In Mohit Kumar (supra) the Single Bench of this Court relying upon a dicta of the Apex Court in Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopathyay and Ors. (2011) 8 SCC 497 had inter alia held as under:

"It has been held that a provision barring inspection/disclosure of the answer books or revaluation of the answer books and

restricting the remedy of the candidates only to re-totalling is valid and binding on the examinee.

If is further settled law that the universities have full autonomy to determine the rules of revaluation."

Another judgment of the Apex Court relied upon by the Single Judge was the judgment in Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission Vs. Mukesh Thakur and Anr. (2010) 6 SCC 759 in which inter alia held as under:

"It has been held that in the absence of any provision under the statue or statutory rules/regulations, the Courts do not generally direct revaluation."

Noting the aforenoted settled position at law, this Court is of the view that these prayers in fact cannot be answered. Petition is without any merit. Dismissed.

INDERMEET KAUR, J NOVEMBER 17, 2017 ndn