The main legal point established is the consideration of a student's performance in a previous examination, in conjunction with a subsequent examination, based on University circulars.

JUDGMENT

Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J. (Oral)

1. This petition seeks for issuance of following directions:

"1. To hold the action of the respondents in grading the petitioner based on 50% marks only of internal assessment for the second semester in place of grading based on 100% marks for internal assessment for the second as arbitrary, discriminatory, Improper, unjustified and hence illegal.

2. To direct the respondents to Grade the petitioner in consonance to the Notification dated 04/06/2020 for the second semester of B.A. Programme based on 100% marks for internal assessment and accordingly issue the final transcript/ marksheet to the petitioner.

3. Pass any other and further order which the Hon'ble High Court may deem fit to pass."

2. According to petitioner, the grading as of now applied by the respondent is arbitrary, discriminatory, and improper.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner states that the petitioner was granted admission under Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) category on 21.11.2019 and immediately after admission of the petitioner, the examination of the 1st Semester was to commence on 27.11.2019 and therefore, the petitioner without any preparation had to appear in the said examination. She states that since the admission of the petitioner was granted under EWS category as per directions given by this court, the extra classes were required to be conducted by the respondent, but the same were also not conducted. She further states that out of four papers, the petitioner could appear only in one paper and realising thereafter, that without any preparation and extra classes, there would be no useful purpose in attempting three remaining papers and therefore, the petitioner did not appear in three subsequent papers. She further states that, in one paper where the petitioner appears, he was awarded `zero' marks, therefore, for all practical purposes, the entire 1st Semester examination should be treated null and void and the same cannot be an examination in the eyes of law.

4. Her further contention is that the respondent-University on account of Covid-19 pandemic issued a notification dated 04.06.2020 for the purpose of awarding grades in 2nd Semester. According to her, 50% marks are to be awarded based on internal assessment and the remaining 50% marks are to be awarded based on preceding examination/ score. She states that since in the case of the petitioner, the preceding examination cannot be considered to be an examination, therefore, the entire evaluation of the petitioner for the purpose of awarding marks in 2nd Semester will have to be conducted as per circular dated 04.06.2020 which provides that for students of intermediate semester/term/year having "no previous performance" i.e., having no marks in previous semester/ term/ year shall be graded on the basis of 100% assignment based evaluation.

5. The petitioner in alternative also submits that since the re- examination of the 1st Semester has already been conducted in the meantime, therefore, at least marks of the 2nd Semester examination of the petitioner should be considered on the basis of marks freshly obtained in the 1st Semester examination in which the petitioner has appeared along with the 3rd Semester examination.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-University opposes the aforesaid submissions and he states that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. According to him, it is not a case of "no previous performance" and in fact, it is a case where the petitioner voluntarily appeared in one of the papers of 1st Semester examination. He further states that when the petitioner wanted to be upgraded to 3rd Semester examination, the petitioner did not raise any grievance with respect to the evaluation/ grading of 2nd Semester examination.

7. According to him, at this stage, the petitioner cannot be allowed to take a plea that in 2nd Semester examination, his evaluation must be done on the basis of "no previ