IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
NUPUR BHATI, J.
Amit Kumar Purohit, S/o. Madhusudan Purohit - Petitioner
Versus
Jai Narain Vyas University, Through Its Registrar & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6985 of 2023
Decided On : 20-02-2024
CGPA Calculation - University Course - Choice Based Credit System - [Choice Based Credit System: Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA)] - The court discussed the guidelines for the Choice Based Credit System and emphasized that the CGPA should be determined based on the overall cumulative performance of a student over all semesters. The court highlighted that the petitioner's absence in the LLM Third Semester meant that his performance and credit points could not be evaluated for the purpose of determining the overall cumulative performance (CGPA). The court directed the university to issue a fresh mark-sheet applying the correct divisor for the calculation of the petitioner's CGPA in the LLM Course.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the method adopted by the University in calculating his CGPA in the LLM course, which resulted in a lower CGPA due to the inclusion of an additional semester. The petitioner argued that his absence in the LLM Third Semester should not have been considered in the CGPA calculation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the University had wrongly applied the divisor of five while determining the petitioner's CGPA, considering the petitioner's absence in all subjects of the LLM Third Semester. The court held that the petitioner's performance and credit points could not be evaluated for the purpose of determining the overall cumulative performance (CGPA).
Issues: The key issue was whether the University's method of calculating the petitioner's CGPA, which included the LLM Third Semester despite the petitioner's absence, was legal and appropriate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the CGPA should be determined based on the overall cumulative performance of a student over all semesters. The petitioner's absence in the LLM Third Semester meant that his performance and credit points could not be evaluated for the purpose of determining the overall cumulative performance (CGPA).
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the University to issue the petitioner a fresh mark-sheet while applying the correct divisor for the calculation of the petitioner's CGPA in the LLM Course.
ORDER :
1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India claiming following reliefs:-
“(a) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the method adopted by the Respondent University in calculating the petitioner’s CGPA in LLM course taking into account five semesters instead of our semesters in LLM i.e. adding maximum marks/points of one additional semester in the divisor for the calculation of petitioner’s CGPA in LLM course, so as to diminish his CGPA, may kindly be declared illegal, arbitrary, capricious & whimsical in nature, and may kindly be quashed and set aside;
(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondent University may kindly be directed to modify/correct the Petitioner’s CGPA to 6.31 in his LLM course, i.e. to substitute CGPA 6.31 for CGPA 4.89 and as a result thereof, consequent corrections may kindly be directed to be made in LLM Third Semester Marksheet correction dated 17.04.2023 (Annexure-4), LLM Fourth Semester Marksheet dated 20.10.2022 (Annexure-5) and LLM Third Semester (Due Papers) Marksheet correction dated 17.04.2023 (Annexure-7);
(c) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondent University may kindly be directed to prepare and issue fresh and final marksheet(s) of the LLM course containing performances/SGPA/points/marks of all the semesters undergone by the petitioner, incorporating the modification/correction of CGPA 6.31;
(d) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, any interpretation of rules relating to LLM course under the Respondent University, which diminishes the petitioner’s CGPA in his LLM course in any way (if any), may kindly be declared to be illegal, and may kindly be quashed and set aside;
(e) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondent University may kindly be directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs.2,00,000/- (in words two lacs rupees) to the petitioner for the mental distress undergone by him due to violation of his fundamental rights and/or other legal rights;
(f) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, exemplary costs may kindly be imposed upon the Respondent University;
(g) Any other appropriate, writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner; and
(h) Petitioner may kindly be awarded the costs of this writ petition.”
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was pursuing LLM Course in the respondent-University and after completing his BA LLB (Five Years’ Integrated Course) from the respondent-University in the year 2019, he took admission in the LLM Course (2 Years’ & 4 Semester Scheme) for the Academic Session 2019-2020. The petitioner appeared and passed his LLM First Semester exam with Semester Grade Point Average (in short ‘SGPA’) 5.90 and the Second Semester with SGPA 6.10.
3. The petitioner took part in Continuous Comprehensive Assessment (CCA) i.e. projects/research papers, term tests and viva for LLM Third Semester. The petitioner, then, filled up the examination form for the Third Semester of LLM, however, he could not appear in the said examination due to his marriage at Bikaner, as function dates were coinciding with the examination dates of LLM Third Semester.
4. In the result declared by the respondent-University, the petitioner was shown as ‘Absent’ in the mark-sheet issued on 09.05.2022 (Annexure-3). The petitioner had submitted the Dissertation for the 7th paper i.e. Non-Doctrinal Research Project (Practical), however, the petitioner could not attend the Viva Voce exam, thus, the petitioner was awarded marks based on the Dissertation.
5. The petitioner was advised to submit the same dissertation afresh and take Viva Voce exam afresh while appearing for the due papers of LLM Third Semester. The petitioner, accordingly submitted the dissertation afresh and also appeared in the due papers of LLM Third Semester and the earlier Mark-Sheet dated
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the CGPA should be determined based on the overall cumulative performance of a student over all semesters, and the absence of a student in a p....
The University acted unlawfully by retroactively applying amended examination regulations, resulting in the wrongful failure of a student who met the passing criteria under the original rules.
Rounding off examination marks must favor students to ensure they are not unduly penalized, in alignment with provisions aimed at fairness.
Point of law : It would normally be prudent, wholesome and safe for the courts to leave the decisions to the academicians and experts. As a matter of principle, the courts should never make an endeav....
The court reaffirms the limited role of judicial review in academic decisions and validates the university's interpretation of a grading notification, rejecting requests for re-computation based on i....
Point of law: It would normally be prudent, wholesome and safe for the courts to leave the decisions to the academicians and experts. As a matter of principle, the courts should never make an endeavo....
Point of Law : If candidate is not at fault then he is not supposed to suffer on account of mistake, committed by University Authorities, suffice it to say by this Court that the Apex Court in the sa....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.