Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Petition for Grace Marks in B. ASLP Course

In a recent case before the Delhi High Court, a writ petition concerning the award of grace marks in the B. ASLP course was dismissed. The petitioner, a student of the 2020-2024 batch, had failed her Otolaryngology paper multiple times and sought grace marks to continue her studies. However, the court ruled against granting the requested relief. Learn more about the intricacies of this judgement by visiting our blog. #HighCourt #LegalCase #GraceMarks

Arguments

  • The petitioner is a student of the 2020-2024 batch in the B. ASLP course at the Institute.
  • She failed her Otolaryngology paper in the second semester multiple times and is unable to continue her studies.
  • The petitioner seeks grace marks to be able to appear for the sixth semester exams.
  • The issue in controversy is whether she is entitled to grace marks or a ‘mercy chance’.
  • Medical records do not show the mother’s illness coinciding with exam dates.
  • Regulation 5 allows for obtaining a degree despite not meeting marks criteria in the last examination.
  • Without grace marks, the petitioner would not have opportunities to re-appear in certain papers as per RCI norms.
  • She requests 5.5 grace marks for her Otolaryngology paper in the third attempt.
  • The University’s 2013 Regulations govern the award of grace marks.
  • The case is distinguished from a previous case where a mercy chance was denied.
  • The discretion for granting a mercy chance lies with the Vice Chancellor.
  • The petitioner applied for grace marks due to an emergency situation with her mother.

Analysis

  • Regulation 5 only applies to n semester examinations at the cusp of obtaining a degree
  • Six grace marks may be awarded at the first attempt at the end of n year, 9 at the second attempt in n+1 year, and 12 at the second re-test in n+2 years
  • Petitioner failed Otolaryngology paper of second semester thrice, unable to attempt the n year examination
  • Benefit of Regulation 5 cannot be extended to petitioner
  • No distinguishing feature justifying a different view from Raj Gangwani judgment
  • Writ petition dismissed in limine

Case Title: SAKSHI KUMARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (2024:DHC:3890)

Case Number: W.P.(C)-6287/2024

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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