IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.
Mr. Abin Thomas Sebastian S/O Dr. Sebastian T.T. And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences And Anr - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 8912 of 2024 (Edn-Res) C/W Writ Petition No. 1916 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 8989 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9017 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9029 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9094 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9228 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9333 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9357 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9412 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9459 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9462 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9716 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9718 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9722 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 9975 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 10509 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 11801 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 11844 of 2024 (Edn-Res) Writ Petition No. 14344 of 2024 (Edn-Res)
Decided On : 19-09-2024
(A) National Medical Commission Act, 2019 - Sections 24 and 57 - Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 - Ordinance dated 05.09.2022 - Petitioners sought grace marks for MBBS examinations, challenging the validity of the ordinance and guidelines that eliminated grace marks - The court held that the 2023 Guidelines supersede previous regulations, and grace marks cannot be awarded post-implementation of these guidelines. (Paras 15-40)
(B) Academic Policy - The court emphasized that the evaluation process is an academic policy matter, and courts should refrain from interfering unless there are legal lacunas. (Paras 41-53)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, MBBS students, sought grace marks for their examinations and challenged the validity of the ordinance governing evaluation procedures, arguing that previous regulations should apply.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the 2023 Guidelines, which do not allow grace marks, are applicable and supersede earlier regulations.
Issues: The main issues were whether grace marks could be awarded under the 2019 Regulations after the introduction of the 2023 Guidelines and the validity of the ordinance governing evaluation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the 2023 Guidelines, which eliminated grace marks, are binding and that academic policies should not be interfered with by the court unless there are clear legal issues.
Result: Writ petitions dismissed.
ORDER :
S SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J.
This Order has been divided into the following sections to facilitate analysis:
| SL. NO | CONTENTS |
| I | Prayer |
| II | Contentions of the Parties |
| III | Analysis A. Whether awarding of grace marks can be continued even after coming into force of the GMER – 23 B. Challenge to the Validity of the Ordinance |
| IV | Consequential Reliefs |
I. PRAYER:
The petitioners in all these writ petitions are students undergoing the MBBS Course. In W.P.Nos. 8912/2024, 14344/2024, 11801/2024, 9718/2024, 9722/2024, 9716/2024, 9462/2024, 9459/2024, 9017/2024, 8989/2024, 9357/2024, 9333/2024, 11844/2024, 9228/2024, 9094/2024 and 9029/2024, the petitioners have sought for the following common relief:
(ii) Seeking quashing of the "Ordinance/Notification governing Central Assessment Programme (CAP) for Theory Paper Assessment of all Under Graduate Health Science Courses, of University" dated 05.09.2022 bearing No.RGU/AUTH/24th Con/Synd/04/2022-23;
(iii) To direct the respondent University to conduct fresh evaluation of the failed subjects of MBBS (RS4) Examinations of November 2023 and January 2024 undertaken by the petitioner and by resorting to two evaluations of the answer scripts and conducting a third evaluation where there is a deviation of 15% marks and thereafter announce results afresh by considering highest marks for the competition of the results; Insofar as W.P.Nos.1916/2024, 10509/2024, 9412/2024, 9975/2024 the petitioners have sought for the following relief:
(i) Summon for photocopies and digital valuation slips;
(ii) To direct the respondent University to conduct additional evaluation under re-evaluation and announce the results by considering the best marks.
(iii) To direct the respondent University to provide an opportunity for the petitioners to appear and write the upcoming examination scheduled on 30.01.2024.
(iv) In W.P.10509/2024, 9412/2024 and 9975/2024 the petitioners have additionally sought for a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to attend II year MBBS Course.
(v) In W.P.No.9975/2024, petitioner has sought for awarding of 2 grace marks in the subject of psychology by considering the representation dated 05.03.2024 and 29.03.2024.
2. In light of the prayers sought for being interrelated to each other, the petitions are disposed off in terms of the following common order.
II. CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES:
3. It is the contention of the petitioners that the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (for short ‘NMC Act’) has a Scheme whereby the Commission is conferred with the power of making Regulations in terms of Section 57 of the NMC Act relating to curriculum at the Undergraduate level, while on the other hand the Undergraduate Medical Education Board (for short ‘UGMEB’) is authorised to perform functions in terms of Section 24 of the NMC Act.
4. It is further submitted that in terms of the Scheme, the Commission is empowered to make Regulations, while the UGMEB is authorised to frame Guidelines and in the hierarchy of Regulations and Guidelines, the Regulations would have to be given precedence.
5. It is specifically averred that in terms of the "Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (amendment) 2019, (for short ‘2019 Regulations’), specifically Regulation 11.2.9 provides for award of grace marks upto a maximum of five marks to be awarded at the discretion of the University and with such addition of grace marks, the candidate could clear the examination as a whole.
6. It is submitted that despite the Guidelines issued by the UGMEB on 01.08.2023 vide Notification No.U.14021/8/2023-UGMEB, which specifically does away with the award of grace marks, the benefit under the 2019 Regulations ought to prevail.
7. It is further contended that the 2019
The 2023 Guidelines supersede previous regulations, prohibiting the awarding of grace marks in MBBS examinations, emphasizing the court's limited role in academic policy matters.
The court established that new educational regulations can supersede previous ones, and students do not have a vested right to evaluation standards that have changed.
Point of Law – Courts will interfere only if they find all or any of the following: (i) violation of any enactment, statutory Rules and Regulations; (ii) mala fides or ulterior motives to assist or e....
The main legal point established is that the Academic Council's decision on valuation procedure should be followed by the respondent-University for the MBBS RS4 examination.
The discretion to award grace marks lies with the university as per MCI regulations and cannot be claimed as a right, especially for practical exams.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.