R.Harresh Kumar v. The Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY R.Harresh Kumar : Appellant in WA No.1925 of 2023 B.Amirtha : Appellant in WA No.1956 of 2023 versus 1.The Registrar, Anna University, Chennai 25 2.The Director, Academic Courses, Anna University, Chennai 25 3.The Additional Controller of Examinations, CEG/ACTECH/MIT/SAP Campus, Anna University, Chennai 25 4.The Dean, School of Architecture and Planning Anna University, Chennai 25 : Respondents Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge in WP No.10180 of 2018 dated 01.03.2023.

For Appellants :

Mr.M.L.Ramesh For Respondent No.1 :

Mr.V.Meenakshisundaram COMMON JUDGMENT (Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) We have heard Mr.M.L.Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr.Meenakshisundaram, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The learned Single Judge has directed that the higher marks obtained in the internal examinations should be taken into consideration for all the three assessments. It is seen that the appellant in WA No.1925 of 2023 had done his internal assessments twice and the appellant in WA No.1956 of 2023 has done her internal assessment once.

4. Under the curriculum, three internal assessments are there. According to the appellants, if the appellant in the first assessment had scored 48 marks; second assessment 35 marks and third assessment 28 marks, as per the order of the learned Single Judge, 48 marks, which is the highest mark in the three assessments, has to be taken; whereas, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, if the average of the three assessments comes to 24 marks and if the appellant again appeared for the subsequent assessments and the appellant's average in the second assessment is 23 marks, 24 marks has to be considered. According to the appellants, they have already passed the external examination, so there was no need for directing them to appear for external examination afresh; where according to the learned counsel for the respondents, the appellants are required to attend the external examination afresh.

4. It would be appropriate if the appellants move the learned Single Judge for clarification and/or such further orders as may be permissible. In that event, all contentions are kept open.

5. In view of the aforesaid, writ appeals are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 22.03.2024 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No tar

To 1.The Registrar, Anna University, Chennai 25 2.The Director, Academic Courses, Anna University, Chennai 25 3.The Additional Controller of Examinations, CEG/ACTECH/MIT/SAP Campus, Anna University, Chennai 25 4.The Dean, School of Architecture and Planning Anna University, Chennai 25

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

(tar) 22.03.2024