Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Nilabh Ranjan – Appellant
Versus
University of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The petitioners are presently ex-students of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi.
2. Both the petitioners enrolled as students for the three years LL. B programme of the Law Faculty in the year 2020-2021. The programme was of six semesters, to culminate in the award of an LL.B. degree.
3. The second semester examination of both the petitioners was conducted in 2021. The results of the examinations were announced on 9 December 2021. We are concerned with the Public International Law paper of Petitioner 1 and the Evidence paper of Petitioner 2. Petitioner 1 passed Public International Law, whereas Petitioner 2 failed in Evidence.
4. Petitioner 1 desired to improve his performance in the Public International Law paper by attempting an improvement examination with the papers of his fourth semester. It is not in dispute that, by opting for sitting in such improvement examination, the original result stands effaced. In other words, when a student who appears in a particular paper decides to re-attempt the paper to improve his gradings, he has to sink or swim with the outcome of the improvement paper.
5. The petitioners gave their fourth semester examination in August 20
The judgment established the principle that students have a limited number of attempts within a specified span period to clear their LL.B courses, and they are not entitled to special examinations af....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the number of opportunities for completing the LL.B. degree course cannot exceed the permissible opportunities as per the applicable rules and....
A student who fails in required subjects is not entitled to progress to the final year of study, even under interim orders, unless eligibility criteria are met.
The court found it unreasonable to deny the candidate the opportunity to complete the degree based solely on the span period rule and did not consider it appropriate to put the onus entirely upon the....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the University's examination rules, specifically regarding the permission for students to appear in the 3r....
The court allowed the petitioner to submit a representation regarding her exam eligibility, emphasizing rights to due consideration.
A university must provide personal communication regarding changes in examination schedules to avoid unfairly denying students their opportunity to complete their course.
The need to interpret university examination rules in favor of the student and consider exceptional circumstances, such as the impact of the pandemic, on a student's ability to sit for examinations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
