Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64703 (KAR)

CHINMAYI SALIMATH D/O. PRABHAKAR SALIMATH v. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

WP/104042/2025 · 2025-07-28

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9276 WP No. 104042 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.104042 OF 2025 (EDN-EX) BETWEEN: CHINMAYI SALIMATH D/O. PRABHAKAR SALIMATH, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SRIRAMNAGAR, HAMPI ROAD, A.S. GUDI, HOSPET, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT OF THE NATIONAL ELIGIBILITY CUM ENTRANCE TEST UG PARLIAMENT BHAVAN, NEW DELHI – 110 020. 2. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY NTA, REPRESENTED BY MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, 1ST FLOOR, NSIC, MDBP BUILDING OKHALA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW DELHI – 110 020. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, URBAN DEVELPOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9276 WP No. 104042 of 2025 4. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA EXAMINATION AUTHORITY, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. P.N.HATTI, AGA FOR R3; SMT. SURABHI KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION/ENDORSEMENT COMMUNICATED THROUGH MAIL DATED 17.06.2025 THEREBY REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER FOR ADDITIONAL 5 MARKS IN THE FINAL KEY ANSWER FOR THE NEET EXAMINATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 VIDE ANNEXURE-H IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 AUTHORITY TO ADD 5 MARKS TO THE PETITIONER IN PURSUANCE OF FINAL ANSWER KEY AS RELEASED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AUTHORITY. CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE FRESH SCORE CARD PERTAINING TO NEET EXAMINATION AS EARLIEST AS POSSIBLE BEFORE ANNOUNCING THE COUNSELING DATE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9276 WP No. 104042 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: A. Issue a writ of in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned communication/ endorsement communicated through mail dated 17.06.2025 thereby rejecting the claim of the petitioner for additional 5 marks in the final key answer for the NEET examination issued by the respondent no. 2 vide Annexure-H in the interest of justice and equity. B. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 authority to add 5 marks to the petitioner in pursuance of final answer key as released by the respondent no. 2 authority. Consequently issue fresh score card pertaining to NEET examination as earliest as possible before announcing the counseling date in the interest of justice and equity. C. Pass any other order as this Hon’ble court deems fits on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. A memo dated 28.07.2025 singed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has been filed, which reads as under; “The counsel for the petitioner submits as under: In the above top noted petition the petitioner in view of subsequent development the respondent authority had allotted additional 4 marks to question - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9276 WP No. 104042 of 2025 No.15, hence the present Writ Petition become in-fractious. Hence the petitioner seeks leave of this Hon’ble court to withdraw the Writ Petition in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. Accepting the submission of learned counsel and the memo, the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. 4. In view of disposal of the writ petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM/- CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29