Judgment N.K.SODHI, J. 1. This order will dispose of two Civil Writ Petitions 2578 and 2713 of 2000 both of which were heard together as common questions of law and fact arise in them.CWP 2578 OF 2000 2. Petitioners are final year students of BAMS professional degree course studying at Sat Sai Murli Dhar Ayurvedic Medical College, Moga (for short the College). When they joined this course, the College was affiliated to the Punjab University, Chandigarh. In July, 1999 a new University was set up in the State of Punjab called Baba Farid University of Health Sciences (hereinafter referred to as the Baba Farid University). All health science institutions in the State of Punjab including the Colleges which were earlier affiliated to Punjabi, Punjab and Guru Nanak Dev Universities were transferred to the Baba Farid University in July, 1999. Baba Farid University being a new University has yet to frame its own Ordinances/Regulations. The Academic Council of this University in its meeting held on 25th November, 1999 decided that till such time the University framed its own Ordinances and Regulations, the examinations of professional courses for each College would be conducted as per the Regulations of the University to which it was affiliated prior to July, 1999. Since the College was earlier affiliated to the Punjab University, the examinations of the students studying in the College including the petitioners were to be governed by the Regulations of the Punjab University. Petitioners appeared in the BAMS (Final) Professional examination conducted by the Baba Farid University in November/December, 1999 and the result of this examination was declared on February 11, 2000. All the petitioners except petitioner No. 2 were to reappear in a subject the abbreviated code of which is CRKU. Petitioner No. 2 was to reappear in 3 subjects including the subject of CRKU. The following chart will show the subjects in which the petitioners were to reappear and also the total number of marks obtained by them as also the minimum marks required to pass in that subject:- Sr. Petitioner No. 2 was to reappear in 3 subjects including the subject of CRKU. The following chart will show the subjects in which the petitioners were to reappear and also the total number of marks obtained by them as also the minimum marks required to pass in that subject:- Sr. No.Name of the petitionerSubject of reappearMarks ObtainedMinimum pass marksGrace marks required to pass in the subject 1.Bhupinder, SinghCRKU43507(Roll No. 3392406)2.Leena JainCRKU42508(Roll No. 3392410)PST951005SHL9610043.Menka(Roll No. 3392412)CRKU425084.Ramandeep Singh(Roll No.3392422)CRKU3650145.Sanjiv Kumar Arora(Roll No. 3392424)CRKU3950116.Sonia Aggarwal(Roll No. 3392426)CRKU475037.Vandana(Roll No. 3392428)CRKU47503 3 It is common case of the parties that the total aggregate marks including the marks of practical and internal assessment of the BAMS (Final) Professional examination are 1850. Regulation 12 of the Punjab University regulations regarding the award of grace marks reads as under :- "Regulation 12, Grace Marks:-(i) 1% of the total aggregate marks including the marks of practical and internal assessment may be awarded to a candidate who fails in one or more subjects in order to declare him to have passed the examination.(ii) A candidate who fails in one or more subjects may be given grace marks up to one per cent in each subject separately in order to declare him eligible for earning exemption in a subject(s).(iii) A candidate who gets exemption in certain subject(s) and reappears in that/those subject(s) may be given grace marks up to one per cent of marks in each subject separately only in those subjects in which he actually reappears in order to declare him to have pased the examination and/or who with this benefit becomes eligible for earning exemption in a subject or subject(s)."Clause (i) of the aforesaid Regulation leaves no room for doubt that 1% of the total aggregate marks could be awarded to a candidate who fails in one or more subjects in order to declare him pass in the examination. Total aggregate marks of the examination are 1850 and 1% of these marks comes to 18.5. In terms of the aforesaid Regulation each candidate is, thus, entitled to 18.5 marks in one or more subjects in order to pass the examination. A perusal of the Chart reproduced above showing the result of the petitioners in the subjects in which they have to reappear, makes it clear that each one of them requires less than 18.5 marks in order to pass the examination. A perusal of the Chart reproduced above showing the result of the petitioners in the subjects in which they have to reappear, makes it clear that each one of them requires less than 18.5 marks in order to pass the examination. Petitioner No. 1 requires only 7 marks whereas petitioner No. 2 requires a total of 17 marks in 3 papers in order to pass the examination. Similarly, the other petitioners also require less than 18.5 marks. In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation in holding that the petitioners are entitled to the grace marks as claimed by them in order to pass the examination and that the Baba Farid University was not justified in refusing to award those marks. What was contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Baba Farid University is that a candidate is entitled to only 1% of the total aggregate marks in each subject and not of the total aggregate marks of the examination. The argument is being noticed only to be rejected. As already observed, under Clause (i) of Regulation 12 with which we are concerned, 1% of the total aggregate marks of the examination are to be awarded as grace marks in one or more subjects in order to declare the candidate pass in the examination. It is only under Clause (ii) that the grace marks can be given only up to 1% of the aggregate in each subject separately but that is only to declare a candidate eligible for earning exemption in a subject. The petitioners before us are not claiming exemption to appear in any subject as envisaged in this clause but are claiming grace marks which are less than 1% of the total aggregate marks of the examination in order to be declared to have passed in the said examination and to which they are entitled under clause (i). 4 It is worth mentioning that when Baba Farid University did not accept the claim of the petitioners for the award of grace marks to the extent of 1% of the total aggregate marks of the examination, they approached the Punjab University seeking clarification as to whether that University had been awarding 1% of the total aggregate marks of the examination as grace marks to the candidates in the BAMS final examination. In response to that representation of the petitioners seeking clarification, the Punjab University clarified that a candidate who appeared in full subjects was given 1% of the total marks of the examination in one or more subjects in order to declare him pass in the examination. In our view, the interpretation placed by the Punjab University on the said Regulation was correct.CWP 2713 of 2000 5. In this case, the petitioner is a student of Government Medical College, Patiala and appeared in the final MBBS examination held in November, 1999. He passed in all the papers except in the subject of Ophthalmology. He secured 34 marks out of 65 in the theory paper and 15 marks out of 35 in clinical (practical). The aggregate marks obtained by him in the subject of Ophthalmology were 49 out of 100 whereas the pass marks were 50. This College was affiliated to the Punjabi University and after July, 1999 it was transferred to the Baba Farid University. The examination held by this College was governed by the Regulations of the Punjabi University. According to the Regulations of the Punjabi University, the minimum requirement for passing the examination is that a candidate must have 50% marks in the aggregate of the subject and at the same time should also have 50% in the clinical in each subject. The petitioner was short by 2-1/2 marks in the clinical and was, therefore, declared to have failed in this subject in which he was required to reappear. Regulation 26(B)(i) of the Ordinances for MBBS examination as framed by the Punjabi University reads as under :- "26(B)(i). The petitioner was short by 2-1/2 marks in the clinical and was, therefore, declared to have failed in this subject in which he was required to reappear. Regulation 26(B)(i) of the Ordinances for MBBS examination as framed by the Punjabi University reads as under :- "26(B)(i). A candidate who fails in one or more papers/subjects and/or aggregate may be given grace marks, up to one per cent of the total aggregate marks (including the marks for practical and internal assessment) to his best advantage in order to be declared to have passed the examination.Provided that the number of grace marks to be given in individual subject should not exceed five."A reading of the aforesaud Regulation makes it clear that a candidate is entitled to grace marks in one or more subjects up to 1% of the total aggregate marks including the marks for practical and internal assessment to the best of his advantage in order to be declared to have passed the examination provided that the maximum number of grace marks which could be given in an individual subject could not exceed 5. In the case before us, the petitioner required only 2-1/2 marks in clinical in order to pass in the subject and also in the examination. The action of Baba Farid University in not awarding these grace marks to the petitioner cannot, therefore, be sustained and it is held that the petitioner was entitled to 2-1/2 grace marks in order to pass the examination. 6. In the result, the writ petitions are allowed and Baba Farid University is directed to award the requisite grace marks to the petitioners as claimed by them in each of the subjects in which they have now been asked to reappear and declare them to have passed in the examination. There is no order as to costs.Petitions allowed.