Allahabad High Court: A Division Bench of Sudhir Agarwal and Rajendra Kumar, JJ. allowed a writ petition for revaluation of answer-sheet due to an error found in the evaluation. 

This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India had been filed by a student undergoing a medical course in S. N. Medical College, Agra affiliated to Dr B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra. The petition assails the irresponsible and unaccountable act of examiners in performance of their duty of evaluation of answer sheets causing great loss to examinees.

Learned counsel for the petitioner Zain Abbas informed the Court that the petitioner appeared in M.B.B.S. Examination. In the second paper of Physiology, out of 50 he was awarded only 6 marks. Thus, he secured only 344 marks out of 600, and was declared fail. He submitted an application for scrutiny of marks and rechecking of the answer sheet, but no action was taken by University. Thereafter, under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 he applied for a copy of the answer sheet of the above paper. Answer sheet was supplied to the petitioner which showed that it was not evaluated by the examiner at all. In an abrupt manner, in three questions, he was awarded 2 marks each, though no answer was found wrong. Thus, the petitioner prayed before the Court to direct the university to revaluate his answer sheet and allow the cost of the proceeding in his favour.

The Court after hearing the facts of the case directed the respondent to send the answer sheet of the petitioner to three different places and to report to the Court once the revaluation is completed. After the revaluation, the Court found that all the three examiners had awarded almost similar marks to the petitioner and the marks awarded by them was far more than the marks awarded by the college. The Court thus observed that it was evident that examiner had not awarded marks by application of mind and it then stood fortified from the evaluation made by three expert examiners. Court further said that such examiner/evaluator is a blot on the pious position and entire community of teachers has no right to continue to function as a teacher. The Court thus allowed the petition and directed the university to award average marks of three examiners, to be awarded to petitioner, and accordingly correct his marks sheet and result and allow him to appear in further examinations accordingly. Court also found it appropriate to award a cost of Rs 1 lakh.[Devarsh Nath Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Writ C No. 871 of 2019, decided on 21-05-2019]

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release


  • Such type of action almost taken in all colleges belong to up. My son appeared in mbbs 1st yrs examination and chatrapati shahu ji maharaj Kanpur University declared fail due to in biochemistry paper he got 53 and 41 out of 100 in each . Now if he got One more marks he got passed with 5 grace marks , The university game was not over here now start the game now, my son very confident regarding his biochemistry paper and applying for answer sheet after university online paid fees, then I show the answer sheet and my younger son is also views , I was notice the examiner given 2 out of 5 and 3 out of ten most of the answer, even one mark overwrite and replaced three by two intestinally and my son was failed, then I was decided to go for rechecking (re evaluation of copy) with additional 3000/- pay for the same . Now got re evaluation mark 56 instead of 41 and college examiner board was not added this re evaluation mark , the told university added mark only in case of students got more than 15% mark out of total full mark 100, not up to 15%, now I m a parents not decided till now the failure of my son , my son was failed or the university systems was failed , university just pushed students careers on a black hole during Covid conditions, I was decided to go for high court for the same.

  • I am a retired Army Officer. I had attempted a promotion exam in Oct 2015 while serving in the Army. The result showed me failed in Military History paper due to which I was not promoted to Lt . Colonel. In May 2016, I retired.
    After retirement I filed RTI for copy of my answerheet which was outrightly denied by Army. Chief Information Commission while considering my 2nd appeal, quashed Army’s request that my answersheet was evaluated on thr basis of the grading assigned by my superiors in my annual performance report so the answersheet becomes CLASSIFIED document and cannot be disclosed to me. They filed a petition citing above reason in Delhi HC asking stay against CIC order to issue me the answersheet. The Hon’ble Court rejected the petition.
    I had filed a case for revaluation in Armed Forces Tribunal, kochi citing the submission of Army before Delhi HC and CIC. I had cited reply of Army to my RTI wherein Army had agreed evaluating answersheet of promotion exam on the basis annual performance report is contrary to existing rules in Army.
    Kindly express your views whether Tribunal will agree to revaluation finding injustice done or should I plead for moderation of 10% (as per 2019 verdict of Hon’ble SC in Punjab and Haryana HC judicial exam) marks.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.