IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7367 of 2011 Decided on: 26th September, 2011. Miss Priya. … Petitioner. Versus H.P. University & others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “(a) Respondents are directed to consider only those marks of the petitioner which she has scored in her regular examination of 1st semester Paper III (History) after rechecking/revaluation for all purposes. (b) Respondents are directed to correct the detailed mark sheet of the petitioner (Annexure P-2) accordingly.” 2. The dispute has a little chequered history. The petitioner was not satisfied as to her marks of the examination, which she undertook in November, 2006 in Paper III (History) first semester. Therefore, she applied for re-evaluation. In the meanwhile, there was a call for re- appearance. Without waiting for a chance, she also applied for re-appearance. The re-appearance was scheduled to be 2 held on 4th July, 2007. Since the petitioner had not been communicated the result of re-evaluation, the petitioner appeared for the re-appearance on 4th July, 2007. After the examination, the result of re-evaluation was communicated to the petitioner and the result is that the petitioner has two mark sheets, one of re-evaluation and the other of re- appearance. Going by the Ordinance, once a candidate appears in the examination for re-appearance, the candidate has to go by the marks secured in the re-appearance. No doubt, in this case the petitioner has secured more marks in the re-appearance. However, it has turned out to the disadvantage of the petitioner as far as the claim for Gold Medal is concerned. The Gold Medal is not available to a candidate in case the marks in the re-appearance are counted. However, the marks secured in the re-evaluation are liable to be counted. It is submitted that even going by the marks secured in the re-evaluation, though the same are lesser than the one she secured in the re-appearance, she is still entitled to have the Gold Medal. 3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the ends of justice would be met only in case the petitioner is held entitled to the claim for Gold Medal, since as on the date of re-appearance, the petitioner had not been communicated the marks she secured in the re-evaluation. Had she known those marks prior to the re-appearance, it is apparent that she would not have gone for re-appearance. 3 In that view of the matter, in the ends of justice, it is declared that the marks of the petitioner secured in the re- evaluation alone shall be counted and the marks in the re- appearance of the petitioner shall be ignored for all purposes. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 26th September, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr) Judge.