APHC010293032026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 15431/2026 Between: 1. BUTREDDY MAHIDHAR REDDY, S/O BUTREDDY MALAKONDAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION STUDENT (MBBS), R/O. H. NO. 5-1-190, USMAN SAHEB PETA, NEAR KRISHNAMANDIRAM, STONEHOUSEPET, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH - 524 002. HALL TICKET NO 21M102003030, SET A 2. V. DEEKSHITH REDDY, S/O V. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION STUDENT (MBBS), RESIDING AT 8-82, NEAR CINEMA STREET, PEAPULLY MANDAL, PEAPALLY, DISTRICT KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH -518221. HALL TICKET., NO 21M102003206 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 238. 2. DR NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 008. 3. THE REGISTRAR, DR. NTR UPIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, VIJAYAWAD , ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 008. 4. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 008. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, KURNOOL MEDICAL COLLEGE, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH - 518 002. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW The Court made the following: ORDER:- Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in releasing the final answer key for the examination conducted by them, more particularly with regard to Question No.17 (set A) / Question No.19 (set D), whereby the question relating to number of layers in the neurosensory retina. The petitioners have marked answer as 9. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that some textbooks have recognized 10 layers in ‘neurosensory retina’. 3. On the contrary, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, as per the textbooks prescribed for the petitioners, its only 9 layers. It is further submitted that, when there was a dispute with regard to the correct answer in the final key issued by the respondents, the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1811 of 2026, directed the respondents to examine the representation of the petitioners therein and to get the papers verified by a different set of examiners for awarding of marks. Since only two petitioners have filed the present writ petition, this order shall have to be restricted to the relief sought for by the petitioners in the writ petition. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the respondents to send the subject exam papers of the petitioners to different set of examiners for awarding marks for the answers submitted by the petitioners and for reconsideration of the correct answer marked by the petitioners insofar the question referred to above. The interim process shall be completed within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed off. There shall no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt: 18.06.2026 Note: Issue CC today. B/o. SR