Back
1997 Supreme(Cal) 120
High Court Of Calcutta
S. K. SEN
SAROJ PODDAR - Appellant
Versus
VICE-CHANCELLOR, CALCUTTA UNIVERSITY - Respondent
W. P. 2008 Of 1996
Decided On : 03/05/1997
The court emphasized the importance of strict adherence to rules, guidelines, and norms in conducting examinations to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary actions by university authorities. It recognized the need for judicial intervention when such irregularities occur and may cause prejudice to students.
Headnote:
UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA - BIOCHEMISTRY EXAMINATION - IRREGULARITIES - CANCELLATION OF EXAMINATION RESULTS - REVALUATION OF ANSWER SCRIPTS - APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT COMMITTEE - GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXAMINERS - DECLARATION OF NON-ENGAGEMENT IN PRIVATE COACHING - VALIDITY OF GUIDELINES - INTERPRETATION OF RULES AND REGULATIONS - MAINTAINABILITY OF WRIT PETITION - ARBITRARY ACTIONS OF UNIVERSITY AUTHORITIES - SCOPE OF JUDICIAL INTERFERENCE - INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, students admitted to M.B.B.S. course after qualifying in West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination, challenged the manner of conducting supplementary Biochemistry examination held in 1996, alleging violations of rules, guidelines, and norms in the appointment of examiners. They claimed bias, discrimination, and favouritism by certain examiners, resulting in unfair treatment and potential victimisation of petitioners who did not take private coaching from the alleged biased examiners.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the University authorities failed to comply with their own guidelines for the appointment of examiners. The concerned examiner, Dr. C.S. Bhattacharyya, did not submit the declaration as required by the University's letter dated 24th June 1996, which prohibited examiners from engaging in private coaching or having near relations appearing in the examination. The court also noted the allegations of discrimination and favouritism by Dr. Bhattacharyya, influencing other examiners to give higher marks to privately coached students.
Issues: 1. Whether the University authorities acted arbitrarily and in violation of their own guidelines for the appointment of examiners. 2. Whether the irregularities and discrepancies in the examination process warranted judicial intervention. 3. Whether the petitioners' answer scripts should be revaluated or re-examined to ensure fair treatment and address potential grievances.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the University authorities' failure to obtain the declaration from Dr. Bhattacharyya, as required by their own guidelines, constituted an irregularity. This departure from the established procedure raised reasonable apprehension that students may not receive fair treatment in the examination. 2. The court recognized that normally, courts do not sit in appeal against the decisions of examining bodies. However, in this case, the apparent irregularity and potential prejudice to the petitioners justified judicial intervention. 3. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Orissa v. Prajnaparamita Samanta, where revaluation of answer scripts was permitted in a medical entrance examination due to irregularities. The court found the facts in the present case to be similar and deemed it appropriate to order revaluation of the petitioners' answer scripts.
Final Decision: The court directed the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Calcutta to appoint the Head of the Department of Biochemistry and Anatomy, Burdwan University Medical Faculty, as an expert to re-examine and/or revaluate the answer scripts of the petitioners. The revaluation was to be completed within six weeks, and the results declared accordingly. The court also expected the Vice-Chancellor to cause an inquiry into the matter by appointing a high-power committee.
( 1 ) IN the instant writ petition the petitioners have challenged the way of conducting and/or holding examination of supplementary Bio-Chemistry, First Professional M. B. B. S. Examination Paper, 1995 held in 1996 and prayed for cancellation of the same. The petitioners have also prayed that the results of the said supplementary Bio-Chemistry examination held in July, 1996 for the year 1995 of the first Professional M. B. B. S. under University of Calcutta should not be published.
( 2 ) THE petitioners are all admitted in the M. B. B. S. course after being qualified in the West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination held in 1993 and/or in 1994.
( 3 ) IT is the contention of the petitioners that the panel of examiners for the said examination were appointed by the University authority in violation of rules, regulations, norms, practice and procedure for appointment of panel of examiners and particularly the guidelines issued by the Controller of Examination dated 24th June, 1996 and the Dean. The guidelines have been annexed to the petition. According to the said guidelines several restrictions have been placed upon the examiners which are inter alia as follows :" (a) He or she should not teach Medical student in any private coaching in violation of the circular of Controller of Examination or any relatives. (b) He or she should not teach in a private tutorial or he or she should not teach in private Coaching Centre. (c) That the examiner should not be a retired teacher, engaged in private coaching during the last 12 months in the particular subject. (d) His or her son or daughter or near relation should not be an examinee in the relevant examination. (e) He or she should be acquainted with the syllabus and teaching in M. B. B. S. Course. (f) He should be acquainted with guidelines as determined by the Controller of Examinations and Dean of Medical Sciences for examination of students and putting marks for Theoretical, oral and practical examination. "
( 4 ) IT has been alleged on behalf of the petitioners that the University authorities intentionally appointed the panel of examiners for the examination concerned in total violation of guidelines, norms, practice and procedure, rules, regulations, circular of Controller of Examinations as well as Dean of faculty.
( 5 ) IT has been specifically alleged that one of the examiners Dr. C. S. Bhattacharyya is running a coaching school in his residence under the name 'upasama' at 47, M. Ramkrishna Ghosh Lane, Calcutta 50, having his telephone No. 557-1652.
( 6 ) IT has further been alleged in the petition that Dr. Bhattacharyya acted as an examiner and took the examination of his own privately coached students who appeared before him and got higher marks. It has also been alleged that Dr. Siddharta Majumdar also exerts influence on other examiners including Dr. Somendu Sengupta, so that the examiners will put marks according to his instruction/influence.
( 7 ) IT has further been alleged in the petition that Dr. S. Majumdar who is a teacher in M. D. Course has no knowledge of M. B. B. S. Course of Calcutta University. He is an external examiner of Post-Graduate Institution from Chandigarh, Punjab. He also did not attend the meeting of the Board of examiners and is not at all acquainted with the mode of examination and guidelines of the University for taking the examination in question before.
( 8 ) IT is also the case of the petitioners that the rule for appointment of examiners were not at all followed inasmuch as a specific procedure and/or regulation to the effect that is 50% of the examiners should be taken from external and 50% from internal. It has been specifically alleged that since the petitioners did not take private coaching from Dr. C. S. Bhattacharyya, their marks might be reduced and the said Dr. Bhattacharyya influenced other teachers also to follow him to deprive the petitioners from getting the real and legitimate marks and as a result thereof the petiti
