THE REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY Vs G. HEMLATHA
Bench: A.K. PATNAIK,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI
Case number: C.A. No.-005992-005992 / 2012
Diary number: 5566 / 2011
Advocates: S. N. BHAT Vs
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA II
Page 1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5992 OF 2012 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8442 of 2011)
THE REGISTRAR, RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, BANGALORE … APPELLANT
VS.
G. HEMLATHA AND OTHERS … RESPONDENTS
JUDGMENT
(SMT.) RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the
judgment dated 28.10.2010 of the Division Bench of the
Karnataka High Court. By the impugned judgment, the
Division Bench declined to entertain the appeal filed by the
appellant challenging the judgment of learned Single Judge of
the High Court permitting rounding-off of the percentage of
Page 2
marks obtained by respondent 1 so as to make her eligible to
get admission to post-graduate course [“PG course”, for
convenience] in M.Sc (Nursing).
3. On 11.03.2011 this Court issued notice only to settle the
question of law raised in the appeal because respondent 1 has
completed the course. This court refused to stay the
impugned order and directed that respondent 1’s admission be
regularized and her results be declared.
4. The question of law involved in this case is whether by
applying the principle of rounding-off the eligibility criteria
prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the
PG course in M.Sc (Nursing) can be relaxed.
5. For deciding the question of law, it is necessary to know
the facts of the case. Respondent 1 completed Bachelor of
Science degree in Nursing with 54.71% aggregate marks from
N.T.R. University of Health Sciences in the year 1997.
Thereafter, she registered herself as a Public Health Nurse and
Midwife. She also registered herself as a nurse under the
2
Page 3
provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Nurses and Midwives
(Extension of Amendment) Act, 1964. She was appointed
as a working staff nurse at the Primary Health Centre,
Nagasamudram (Andhra Pradesh) on 08.07.1999. She served
for eight years and three months in the said institution. She
made a representation to the Regional Director of Medical
Health Services seeking permission to pursue the PG course in
M.Sc (Nursing). The eligibility criteria prescribed by the Indian
Nursing Council for securing admission to the said PG course
was 55% aggregate marks. The petitioner, however, secured
54.71% aggregate marks. She approached the Secretary,
Indian Nursing Council, the third respondent herein,
requesting that a certificate of eligibility be issued to her. The
third respondent communicated to her that 0.50% would
normally be rounded-off to next digit. She was asked to
approach the concerned authority of the institute in that
regard. Accordingly, she approached the petitioner. The
petitioner gave her the eligibility certificate. She, then,
approached the Principal, Navodaya College of Nursing,
Raichur, Karnataka, the second respondent herein. With the
3
Page 4
said certificate she obtained admission in the management
quota.
6. When she was preparing to take the annual examination,
she was informed by the second respondent that she was not
eligible to take examination as she has secured less than 55%
in the qualifying examination. She approached the petitioner
for reconsideration of her case. She was informed that on
reconsideration it was found that she was not eligible to take
examination. She, therefore, preferred writ petition in the
High Court challenging the said communication. She obtained
an interim order permitting her to take first year examination.
She took the examination but, results were withheld. She was
also permitted to take the second year examination by an
interim order. Thus, she has completed the PG course by
taking both the examinations. As stated by us earlier, while
issuing notice, this court directed that her results be declared
and her admission be regularized.
4
Page 5
7. By order dated 01.09.2010 learned Single Judge of the
High Court, by applying the rule of rounding-off of numbers,
held that 54.71% marks obtained by respondent 1 should be
rounded-off to 55%. Thus, respondent 1 became eligible by
virtue of the High Court’s order. Learned Single Judge set
aside the endorsement issued by the petitioner stating that
respondent 1 was not eligible for admission to the PG course
in M.Sc. (Nursing). The said order was carried in appeal to the
Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court by the appellant.
The Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court declined to
entertain the appeal. The Division Bench observed that it was
not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised by
learned Single Judge in rounding-off of 54.71% to 55%. In
the circumstances, the Division Bench held that respondent 1
did possess required qualification to get admission to PG
course.
8. In Orissa Public Service Commission and Another v.
Rupashree Chowdhary and Another (2011) 8 SCC 108 this
Court in somewhat similar fact situation considered whether
5
Page 6
the eligibility criteria could be relaxed by the method of
rounding-off. The Orissa Public Service Commission published
an advertisement inviting applications from suitable
candidates for the Orissa Judicial Service Examination, 2009
for direct recruitment to fill-up 77 posts of Civil Judges (JD).
Pursuant to the advertisement, the first respondent therein
applied for the said post. She took the preliminary written
examination. She was successful in the said examination.
She, then, took the main written examination. The list of
successful candidates, who were eligible for interview, was
published in which the first respondent’s name was not there.
She received the mark sheet. She realized that she had
secured 337 marks out of 750 i.e. 44.93% of marks in the
aggregate and more than 33% of marks in each subject. As
per Rule 24 of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa
Judicial Service Rules, 2007 (for short “the Orissa Rules”), the
candidates who have secured not less than 45% of the marks
in the aggregate and not less than a minimum of 33% of
marks in each paper in the written examination should be
called for viva voce test. Since the first respondent therein
6
Page 7
had secured 44.93% marks in aggregate she was not called for
interview/viva voce. The first respondent approached the
Orissa High Court. The High Court allowed the writ petition.
The appeal from the said order was carried to this court. After
considering the Orissa Rules, this court held that Rule 24
thereof made it clear that in order to qualify in the written
examination a candidate has to obtain a minimum of 33%
marks in each of the papers and not less than 45% marks in
the aggregate in all the written papers in the main
examination. This court observed that when emphasis is
given in the rule itself to the minimum marks to be obtained,
there can be no relaxation or rounding-off. It was observed
that no power was provided in the statute/rules permitting
any such rounding-off or giving grace marks. It was clarified
that the Orissa Rules are statutory in nature and no dilution
or amendment to such rules is permissible or possible by
adding some words to the said statutory rules for giving the
benefit of rounding-off or relaxation.
7
Page 8
9. In our opinion, the ratio of this judgment is clearly
applicable to the facts of this case. Judgment of the Full
Bench of Allahabad High Court in Vani Pati Tripathi vs.
Director General, Medical Education and Training and
Others (AIR 2003 All 164) and judgment of the Full Bench of
Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kuldip Singh, Legal
Assistant, Punjab Financial Corporation vs. The State of
Punjab and Others (1997) 117 PLR 1, were cited before us
because they take the same view. However, in view of the
authoritative pronouncement of this Court in Orissa Public
Service Commission (supra), it is not necessary for us to
discuss the said decisions.
10. No provision of any statute or any rules framed
thereunder has been shown to us, which permits rounding-off
of eligibility criteria prescribed for the qualifying examination
for admission to the PG course in M.SC (Nursing). When
eligibility criteria is prescribed in a qualifying examination, it
must be strictly adhered to. Any dilution or tampering with it
will work injustice on other candidates. The Division Bench
8
Page 9
of the High Court erred in holding that learned Single Judge
was right in rounding-off of 54.71% to 55% so as to make
respondent 1 eligible for admission to PG course. Such
rounding-off is impermissible.
11. We make it clear that this order merely settles the
question of law and shall not have any adverse impact, in any
manner, on the service of respondent 1.
12. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
…………………………………..J. (A.K. PATNAIK)
…………………………………..J. (RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI)
NEW DELHI. AUGUST 23, 2012
9