2013 Supreme(Bom) 981
In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
R.P. SONDURBALDOTA & U.V. BAKRE, JJ.
Master Rushil A.A. Diniz
Versus
Goa University & Others
Writ Petition No.147 of 2013
Decided on : 10-05-2013
For the Petitioner:S.D. Lotlikar, Senior Advocate with N. Sardessai, D. Shirodkar, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1 & R3, A.N.S. Nadkarni, Advocate General with D. Lawande, Government Advocate, R2, A.D. Bhobe, Advocate.
Headnote:Goa University Act - Constitution of India, Articles 226 and 227 - Writ petition - Challenging constitutional validity of some of provisions of Ordinances, OA 5,16 and OC 47A under Goa University Act in respect of grace marks at University Examinations and award of Entitlement marks and relating to BCA revised course structure - Contention that classification made between grading system and non-grading system is artificial and exclusion of examinations, with grading system from provisions of grace marks is discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution - Provisions under two ordinances operate in two different and distinct spheres - No comparison can be made in between two even for purpose of allotment of sports merit marks - A student, being well informed of system and standard of evaluation of any course, chosen course, cannot complain about system later when he failed to meet standard - Challenge to constitutional validity of provisions under Ordinances has no substance to any extent as nothing unjust or capricious or partial about grading system - System adopted provides for addition of entitlement marks to grade points, being part of system, cannot be interfered with by Court - Petition devoid of merit - Dismissed.
Goa University Ordinance - OC 47-A and OA 5.16 - Entitlement marks for sports activities.
Since policy of evaluation of students, allotment of marks and giving additional marks for sports activities is within academic domain of University hence provisions under ordinances warrants no interference. - Students who are evaluated on grading system are class by themselves. Provisions under two ordinances operate in two different distinct spheres and there can be no comparison between two even for purpose of allotment of Sports merit Marks. Unlike mark system, grading system is progressive system of evaluation having continuous evaluation of student.
Student while taking admission to any course is well informed of system and standard of evaluation of any course. Having chosen course, despite system, he cannot have luxury of complaining about it at later point of time when it is not possible for him to meet standard. Grading system is not partial or inequitable. Similarly there is no substance in challenge to constitutional validity of provisions under ordinances to any extent.
The petitioner herein is a student of respondent no.2, college for the stream of Bachelor of Computer Application (B.C.A.). He is also a sportsman and has represented respondent no.2 in inter-collegiate Table Tennis Tournament. Respondent no.2 is affiliated to respondent no.1, Goa University.
2. The petitioner appeared for the first semester of B.C.A. and cleared all the papers except the paper of Computer Organization and Reconstruction. In that subject he failed to secure the grade for passing i.e. grade "D". He has been awarded grade "F" which is for failure. He therefore applied for verification of his marksheet and learnt that he had secured 34 marks in the subject. The minimum marks required for passing being 40 the petitioner had failed by 6 marks.
3. Admittedly, having represented respondent no.2 in inter-collegiate tournaments the petitioner is entitled to receive 10 marks called "Entitlement Marks". The dispute raised in the present petition is about the mode or manner of allotment of the "Entitlement Marks" by the respondents. It is the desire of the petitioner that these marks should be added to the subject of Computer Organization and Reconstruction wherein he has failed. On such addition he would be able to clear the subject since the total of the marks for that paper would then go up to 44. This is the basic purpose of the petition. For achieving this purpose constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the ordinances under Goa Universities Act have been challenged and submissions on interpretation thereof have been made. It will be therefore convenient to first note the relevant provisions made in the two ordinances i.e. ordinance OA 5.16 and ordinance OC 47A.
4. The relevant provisions under the two ordinances are reproduced below:
Ordinance OA 5.16 Instructions relating to the grace marks at the University Examinations.
OA 5.16 - Effective from (25th July, 2011) Scheme for award of entitlement marks and grace marks at the University Examinations.
This ordinance shall apply to all University examinations except where separate provisions for gracing are made by respective statutory Councils or Ordinance made by Goa University or wherever Grading system of evaluation is in force.
OA 5.16.1 Effective from (25th July, 2011) Scheme for Award of Entitlement Marks.
Candidates who have participated in NCC/NSS/Sports/Cultural events shall be entitled
to entitlement marks as per the following scheme.
I) .......
II) …...
III) …..
A .....
a) .....
b) ….
B) …. IV) A The above category of students participating in the NCC/NSS/Cultural Events at the University/Inter State/National/International level (representing the university or State) level shall be entitled to the gracing of 1% of maximum aggregate marks under any one or more of conditions (a) to (d) mentioned before, for the examination pertaining to the respective semester/academic year.
a) A candidate who fails to pass in one or more heads of passing shall be graced to the extent of 5% of the maximum marks allotted to the head of passing subject to a maximum of 1% of maximum aggregate marks.
b) A candidate shall be entitled to grace marks upto a maximum of 1% of maximum aggregate marks for the purpose of the award of class/honours or distinction at an examination or head of passing.
c) A candidate who fails to pass an examination shall be graced up to a maximum of 1% of the maximum aggregate marks for the purpose of an exemption in a Head/Heads of passing provided the marks so graced in a Head/Heads of passing shall not exceed 5% of the maximum marks allotted to the Head/Heads of passing.
d) The entitlement marks whether allotted or not fully or partially under any of the heads of passing shall be shown along with the grand total with appropriate '#' sign.
Provided that in the case of a candidate appearing at the University examination under semester system, the benefit of gracing mentioned above shall be given at the respective semester