Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prateek Jalan, J.
Akant Pandey (Dr.) - Appellant
Versus
National Board of Examinations - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11213 of 2021 & CM Appl. 34519 of 2021
Decided On : 21-12-2021
Unconditional withdrawal of a writ petition precludes a petitioner from filing a fresh petition on the same issues, reinforcing the need for adherence to established examination policies without evidence of arbitrariness.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition pertaining to maximum attempts in DNB practical examination - The petitioner availed the maximum attempts but was denied further based on regulations. Court upheld the decision of the National Board of Examinations, emphasizing no arbitrariness in their policy. (Paras 2, 6, 10, 13)
(B) Withdrawal of Writ Petition - Unconditional withdrawal leads to abandonment of the right to institute fresh writ petition for the same relief. (Paras 7, 8, 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a doctor, sought additional attempts for the DNB practical examination after exhausting the maximum allowed attempts. The NBE adhered to their policy and denied further attempts.
Findings of Court:
The petition was dismissed as the court found no grounds to grant further attempts, reinforcing adherence to examination policies.
Issues: The legitimacy of denying further attempts under the imposed limit and the petitioner's right to challenge the policy after withdrawal of the earlier petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court noted the petitioner was aware of the regulations and chose to proceed with the new examination pattern, thus rationalizing the NBE's adherence to their policies.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's background and examination attempts. (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. legal reliefs sought by petitioner. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. withdrawal of previous petition impacts current claims. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. exam pattern change and petitioner's choices. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's limited role in academic matters and petition dismissal. (Para 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)
The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The petitioner is a doctor. He enrolled for the Diplomate of National Board ["DNB"] examination and has cleared the theory component of the said examination. The grievance with which he has approached the Court concerns the maximum number of attempts available for clearing the practical component of the DNB.
2. The undisputed position is that, in terms of the Information Bulletin issued for the DNB Final examination from time to time, a candidate is given maximum of three attempts to clear the practical examination. The petitioner availed of those three attempts in the June 2019 session, December 2019 session and December 2020 session. However, he was unable to score the minimum pass marks of 150/300. The respondent no.1-National Board of Examinations ["NBE"] has, therefore, taken the position that he cannot be granted any further attempts.
3. The petitioner first approached this Court with regard to this grievance in W.P.(C) 9748/2021. The reliefs sought in W.P.(C) 9748/2021 were as follows:
"a) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents No.1 and 2 to permit the Petitioner to participate in the upcoming practical examination likely to be held in October, 2021;
b) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents No.1 and 2 to provide copies of answer sheets of the Petitioner in respect of examination held in 03.07.2021 while also directing the Respondents to consider Petitioner's request for re-checking and/or reevaluation of Petitioner's examination papers;
c) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing or setting aside the rule/order/circular/notification dated 22.06.2020 inter alia imposing limit of three attempts in practical examination being arbitrary, unconstitutional and without any legal basis, especially after change in pattern and also considering the prevailing corona-virus situation;
d) any other or further relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the above facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents, in the interest of justice."
4. By an order dated 07.09.2021, the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the writ petition with the following observations:
"1. The present petition has been filed by a doctor who is a candidate for the D.N.B. (Diplomate of National Board) in Family Medicine. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents, permitting him to participate in the practical examination schedule to be held in October, 2021.
2. After some hearing, Mr. Rajesh Yadav, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition unconditionally, but with liberty to pursue his representation dated 30.08.2021 with the respondents.
3. Mr. Yadav submits that the petitioner is conscious of the fact that he has taken the practical examination three times, which is the maximum permitted under the relevant circular of the respondent no.1/National Board of Examinations ["NBE"], and he only seeks sympathetic exercise of the respondent's discretion on the grounds stated in his representation dated 30.08.2021. Ms. Ruchira Gupta, learned counsel who appears for the NBE on advance notice, states that the representation will be decided within a week.
4. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn unconditionally. The respondents will however
