Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 194 (DEL)

VIBHUTI GAUR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

2007-01-29

BADAR DURREZ AHMED

body2007
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. ( 1 ) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned letter dated 3. 11. 2004 issued by the Assistant Controller of the Examination, University of delhi. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to re-appear in the M. A. English (final year) examination under the "without surrender category". ( 2 ) THE letter dated 3. 11. 2004 was issued by the Assistant Controller of examination in response to a "mercy appeal" for grant of permission to appear in certain papers of the M. A. English course for improvement. By the said letter dated 3. 11. 2004, the petitioner was informed that her application addressed to the Vice Chancellor could not be acceded to. ( 3 ) THE petitioner appeared for the M. A. English examinations of the first and second years conducted by the University of Delhi in the academic sessions of 2001 and 2002. The marks obtained by her qualified her for the award of a degree of M. A. in English. However, since the marks obtained by her were not to her liking, she wanted a further improvement in the same. She re-appeared in all the 16 papers of both the Part-I and Part-II examinations for the M. A. English course. The net result was that while there was some improvement in her performance, it was still not upto her aspirations. It is now contended on behalf of the petitioner that there was confusion as to whether she went in for improvement of marks under "surrender category" or "without surrender category. " Since there was confusion and she was under a mistaken impression, it was contended on her behalf, she may be permitted to re-appear in the final year examination under the "without surrender category". ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the University pointed out that there were two categories whereby a candidate who qualified for the award of a degree on the result of the Part-II examination of the M. A. course could improve his or her performance. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the University pointed out that there were two categories whereby a candidate who qualified for the award of a degree on the result of the Part-II examination of the M. A. course could improve his or her performance. One was the category where the candidate could be permitted to appear/re-appear in one or more courses of the Part-II examination to be held in the next succeeding year on his or her foregoing the earlier performance in writing in the courses concerned, in case, he or she had previously appeared for the same. This category was known as the "surrender category". The second category of candidates who could improve the performance was known as the "without surrender category". This entails that a candidate could re-appear either in all the written courses prescribed for the first year or in all the written courses prescribed for the second year or in the written courses of both the years. Such candidates were allowed to re-appear at the examination as an ex-student only once and that too within a period of five years of the date of his or her qualifying in the examination initially. ( 5 ) IT is further submitted by the counsel for the parties that in the "surrender category", the entire mark sheet in respect of the papers for which the candidate re-appears is surrendered and as a result the original marks obtained are completely washed aside. Whatever marks the candidate achieves on re-appearance will be the final marks awarded to him or her as per the fresh mark sheet and the percentage marks obtained in totality would be calculated on the basis of the fresh mark sheet and not on the basis of the original mark sheet which he or she surrendered. In respect of the "without surrender category", the situation is that the person who appears in various courses will be given a fresh mark sheet for all the subjects in accordance with the improvement attained by him or her. In case the candidate does not improve then the original marks would be retained. ( 6 ) IN the present case, there is a controversy sought to be raised as to whether the petitioner appeared in the "surrender category" or "without surrender category". In case the candidate does not improve then the original marks would be retained. ( 6 ) IN the present case, there is a controversy sought to be raised as to whether the petitioner appeared in the "surrender category" or "without surrender category". However, in my view, since the petitioner appeared in all 16 papers of both Part-I and Part-II of the M. A. Examinations, it cannot be considered to be a case where the petitioner had appeared in the "surrender category" because that is only limited to the Part-II examination and does not extend to the Part-I examination. This being the case, it is clear that the petitioner re-appeared under the "without surrender category". Insofar as this category is concerned, it is further subject to the condition, as mentioned above, that a candidate is permitted to re-appear at the said examination as an ex-student only once. She, having already so appeared in 2003, could not be permitted to re-appear and in this light the letter dated 3. 11. 2004 cannot be said to be contrary to law. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, this writ petition is dismissed, however, with the direction that the petitioner's fresh mark sheet based upon her performance in all the 16 papers in 2003 shall be issued in terms of the rules to indicate the improvement attained by her.