IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 2710 of 2009 Between: A.S.Divya Teja S/o.A.J. Subramanyam Reddy Pt.No.205 MLA Qrtrs, Panjagutta, Hyderabad-82. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, represented by Registrar, Vijayawada. 2 Principal, Bhaskar Medical College, Moinabad, R.R. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent in not revaluating the answer scripts of the Petitioner pertaining to Anatomy paper I & II as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to revaluate the answer scripts of the petitioner pertaining to Anatomy Paper I & II of M.B.B.S. I year in order to revaluate the answer scripts of the Petitioner by an expert and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.S.P.SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.D.V.NAGARJUNA BABU The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA WRIT PETITION No. 2710 of 2009 Oral order: The petitioner filed this writ petition questioning the action of the respondent No.1-University in not re-evaluating her answer scripts of anatomy Papers I & II of M.B.B.S. First Year, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents to evaluate the said answer scripts. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent- University submitted that there is no provision for re-evaluation of answer scripts and submitted that this Court, taking into consideration the provisions of Section 30 of the N.T.R. University of Health Sciences Act, 1986 had directed the 1st respondent to constitute a Grievances Committee to enable the students like the petitioners to approach the said Committee for redressal of their grievances, and the 1st respondent-University had constituted the Grievances Committee as directed by this Court, and in fact, this Court disposed of similar writ petitions in W.P. Nos. 22274 of 2008 and batch by an order dated 18.11.2008 directing the petitioners therein to approach the said Committee for redressal of their grievances. In view of the above, both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent-University, agreed to the disposal of this writ petition by and in terms of the order dated 18.11.2008 in W.P. Nos.22274 of 20008 and batch. Hence, following the said judgment, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioner is directed to approach the Grievances Committee constituted under Section 30 of the Act by the 1st respondent-University, within a period of ten days from today and submit a representation for redressal of his grievance and the Grievances Committee shall look into the answer scripts of the petitioner with the help of a subject expert and decide the same within a period of Fifteen days thereafter. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA,J Dated: 13th February, 2009 KSR