IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 11426 of 2009 Between: Ega Vineeth Kumar Reddy, S/o. A. Limba Reddy, Hall Ticket No. 0367023 T, Sri Venkateswara Medical College, Tirupathi, R/o. H.No. 5-11-742, Yellammagutta, Nizamabad. ..... PETITIONER AND Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada. Rep. by its Registrar. .....RESPONDENT 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 issue appropriate writ or order ro direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent in not revaluating the answer paper of final year Surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology written by the Petitioner with Hall Ticket No. 0367023 T, in March 2009 as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent to revaluate the answer paper of final year Surgery jand Obstetrics and Gynecology written by the Petitioner with Hall Ticket No. 0367023 T, in March 2009. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.GIRI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.D.V.NAGARJUNA BABU The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 11426 of 2009 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent in not revaluating the answer paper of final year Surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology of the petitioner with hall ticket No.0367023 T in the examinations held in March, 2009 is arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent- University that in identical circumstances, this Court dismissed W.P.No.379 of 2008 by order dated 16.04.2008 holding that there was no justification for entertaining the claim of the petitioner therein for ordering revaluation of the answer script. However, this Court observed that a Grievance Committee has to be constituted by the first respondent-University so that the students like the petitioner therein can approach the said Grievance Committee and also prefer appeals to the Executive Council in terms of Section 55 of the Dr.NTR University of Health Sciences Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’). A counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the University stating that after the order of this Court in W.P.No.379 of 2008, the University has been constituting the Grievance Committees which comprises special experts to go into the claims of the students and the decision of the said committee is also appealable to the Executive Council under Section 55 of the Act. It is further stated that if in case any representation is made by the petitioner seeking to refer the matter to Grievance Committee, such requests will be considered and the case will be referred to the Grievance Committee. Having regard to the stand taken by the first respondent- University in the counter affidavit, no further enquiry is necessary in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the first respondent-University with a request to refer the matter to the Grievance Committee. If any such application is made, the first respondent shall receive the same and refer it to the Grievance Committee within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of such application. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated:13-07-2009 Note: Issue C.C. by tomorrow. B/o KLP