3n^?T ??T ^[ch ^SH 37T^T 5b*lict» IWN^ ^^} ]m/^^ 'S^ ^||-qi<'l><1, ^^fl^l1!^, (s|<?'»l'M^< V,;. ?^o. n73/^o(3 Nl*4dl (b^lcb "•""""— "—""•—"•-""•^ 200 3n^?r-q^w ((i?<^<^) '^ITW^^T^H^T BB: MISHKA.J. PETITIQNER RESPONDENTS 35-3-2UU_8 ShriB.P. Rao, Advo< By this petition iin< the petitioner seeks a dirc viva-voce examuiation by per tlie stamtoiy provisioi Grievaiice of the pe1 II. He appeared ui 4 pap( also iii the viya-voce exs June, 2007. He o'btained voce examuiation conciii expectecl to get-'/b maj^ exaiiiirteition was condu chl^id^l'1 "WRif ^f.'fe^ <Ri«ci< ^3TRFT3^T Suniit Kuniar Soni, S/o Shri xAnibika^y Prasad Soni, aged about 31 yeai's, Techiiician ta B.S.P., Bhilai, residiiig at : i3i front of Andhra School, Caoip No. 1, Viiiida Nagaj:', Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG)- 490 001 Pt. Ravishaiikai' Shukla UniYer&i^, Raipur, through fhe Vice Chaiicellor, Pt. Ravishajiikaj: Shukla University, Raipiir (CG)- 492001. 2.1 The Registrar (Coiifideiitial), Pt. RR-visli^iil^RT -Sliulcl^. Uiiiycrsit\;r« I^QII^UT (CG)~ 492 001 3.1 The Head of the Depai'tnient, School of Stiidies, Departaient of Law, Pt. Ravisha-iikaj: Shukla University, Raipur (CG)-492 001 'ate for fhe petitioner. [er Article 226 of the Constitxition of Iiidia, lction to the respouclent No. 4 to teke fresh flie duly coD.stitxited Board ofExamiiiers as ls, Itioner is that he was student of LL.M, Part rs of 1st aiid.2nd Semesters of part 11 aiid i^miiiation. The result was declared 011 1st jnly 67 marks out of 100 aiarks in tlie viva- l^ted cn 1st Jaiitiaiy, 2007, though he fe. He farther siibmits that. tlie viva-voce ['t.ed by onfy one extero.al examiiier in s&»».KS^^i-ws^^^^.£^^^^ i^s^.i^^.^s.w^^^.s^ SC—78 3?n^T ^T f<^ich ^TSIT 'STI^T 5h+li<=b _^ 75^ ^N 10-4, ^xn^'Ko, {sl^Wy L^.^'Ni?. 11-7 9/ 'qraw ^wra? •••"""•"•""""—""••"'•-"•••^ 200 3ni(?r ^i^ra? (4c<^<i^) '^nw^f^T ^TT^T violation of pai'a 17(1) of tlie viva-voce exaiD.Hiati<|) examiiiers aiid one uiteitiial extemal examiiier wasl farther argued that tl^ subjects, whereas the vit itjs setded law tlt. iiot be clii'ected iii tlie sajiie aiiaiog;f, re-GOBCiii^tuig dii'ected iu the absence So far as me obj4: was couducted by only| 17(1) ofStamte 29 is concenied, from the tliat. tlie petitioiier app| 2007 and did not fiiially declai'ed on lf3t| eaiiiiot be peniiitted n<| staiid tliat Uie examiii^ aiicl regulation aiid Stati|ite In vieiv of the abol fresh viva-voce examinl clesei-ves to be dismissi accorcliiigly dismissed. <=bi<it<n<i1i 'HW^f ^f,fe^ <f^i^i< ^^ifiw^n^r Statute 29 which provides that iu fhe case oft )H for LL.M. (Fma!) fhere wffl be two extenial examiner. However, iii this case, outy one; caJled for conductiiig viva-voce test. It is petitioner api3eare.cl m Torts aiid CiTme ^a-voce was takeii in Constitutioiiai law. lat re-evaluation of tlie aiiswer books should [il^sence of cleai' rules ui that regajd, In the; ot viva-voce exaiauiation caii also not De |)fcleaT iiiles iii that rcgaiTl. 'tiou of fhe petitkjner that the viva-voce tesf oue extenial exajauier iii violation of para" to Ft.. Ravi Sliaiikar Shukla University,2 Iplee.diiig iii the writ petition, it is obsei'vecl ^ared m. tlie viva-voce test on l<5t Jto.uaiy^ fhe above illegality till the rcsult was June, 2007 aiid, therefore, fhe petitioner ^w after declaration of the resutt to take a Ition was conducted ia viDlation of the rules ilite of the Uui^ersit^. '< <7e, the prayer.ofthe petitioner for conductmg i^.tion caiinot be graiiteci aiici tlie petitioii ^d at the admissiou stage and fhe same ts appllcable cha4enge Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge