Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
D.N.PATEL, JYOTI SINGH
Jyoti Thakur – Appellant
Versus
Ignou – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal by original petitioners regarding grace marks (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments about appellant's merits and previous marks (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. court reasoning against granting grace marks (Para 5) |
| 4. dismissal of the appeal (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
CM APPL. 800/2021 & CM APPL. 802/2021 (both for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The applications are disposed of.
LPA 14/2021 & CM APPL. 801/2021 (addl docs.)
1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.11.2020 in W.P.(C) 9420/2020, original petitioners have preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.
2. Counsel appearing for the appellants (original petitioners) at the outset submitted that the appeal is not pressed for appellant no.2 (original petitioner no.2). Thus, this appeal is being decided only with respect to appellant no.1.
3. Grievance of appellant No.1 (original petitioner No.1) is that the learned Single Judge has not directed respondent No.1/IGNOU to grant 16 grace marks to appellant No.1 in Course Code - LSE4L, which is the f
The court ruled that grace marks in examinations cannot be granted without legal or regulatory support, upholding academic integrity.
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.
The main legal point established is that the absence of a specific provision for a 'Second Mercy Attempt' and the need for evidence to support claims of illness during an examination.
The literal meaning of the words in ordinances should be accepted, and the interpretation contrary to the plain and literal meaning of the words should not be accepted.
Established academic rules must be adhered to, and courts cannot grant relief based solely on sympathy if it contradicts legal competence and authority.
Denial of EWS reservation in admission violates constitutional provisions; interim orders do not finalize rights, thus appealing them lacks merit.
The court emphasized the principle of not prejudicing a petitioner for delays caused by external factors and directed the respondent to permit continuation of the MBA course.
Point of Law : Director of Secondary Education, Assam may go ahead with the process of verification. However, no final appointment would be made without undertaking the exercise as indicated in the r....
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
