IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.15593 of 2007 Dated: August 6, 2007 Between: Bokkisam Suneel, S/o. Sudhakar, Age: 27 years, Occ: Student, R/o. Kasaram, Thottambedu Mandal, Chittoor District. … Petitioner And The Vice Chancellor, Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada, Krishna District, And others. … Respondents Order: This writ petition has been filed seeking Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not properly revaluing the answer sheets of the petitioner with regard to final semester of final year M.Sc. Medical Biochemistry, a faculty course conducted by the second respondent-university, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. Petitioner was admitted into M.Sc. Medical Biochemistry, a course, which was started by the second respondent-university, in Narayana Medical College, Nellore. Having completed all the semesters of first and second year, petitioner appeared for examinations of final semester in April/May 2007. The case of the petitioner is that he fared well in the said examinations and was expecting 80% marks, however, he secured very less marks in the written examinations. His grievance is that the respondents did not properly value his answer scripts. It is primarily alleged that he has taken additional answer script, which he attached to the main answer script and the same might be missing, resulting in its non-valuation. 4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has placed before this court written instructions along with O.M.R. sheets of the said examinations. In the instructions, it is stated that petitioner has written all the answers for 10 questions in the main answer booklet and took one additional booklet. It is stated that all the additional booklets were also valued along with the main booklet and accordingly marks were awarded. A perusal of the answer scripts would indicate that marks awarded to each question were totaled and accordingly total marks were indicated. 5. In view of the fact that all the answer scripts of the petitioner, i.e. one main answer booklet and one additional booklet were valued and accordingly marks were awarded, and no other ground is urged, I do not find any illegality in the procedure adopted by the respondents. Hence, no direction as sought for can be given. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY. August 6, 2007 MRR