Case BriefsHigh Courts

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]