Back
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Neha Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sikkim University Through The Vice Chancellor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments presented by the petitioner and respondents. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning regarding the regulations and their constitutionality. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 4. the judgment regarding the unconstitutionality of the impugned provision. (Para 40 , 41) |
| 5. final order of the court awarding the gold medal. (Para 42) |
JUDGMENT
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J. - Ms Neha Sharma has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking enforcement of her fundamental rights as well as challenging the legality and validity of the last sentence of Clause 10 of the Regulations on Conduct of Examinations of the Sikkim University (the Regulations).
2. It is the case of the petitioner that in December 2016, she appeared for the III Semester Master of Arts December 2016 Examination conducted by the Sikkim University (respondent no.1) in the subject “Social Movements in India”. She secured 69 out of 100 marks and her Sessional Grade Point Average
The provision denying a gold medal to re-evaluated candidates was declared unconstitutional, reinforcing the principle of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Education Law - Re-evaluation and re-scrutiny of result - A student who has been permitted to seek reevaluation in terms of Clause 6 of Regulations and her marks considered as final score post re-eva....
The benefit of revaluation should be considered for deserving candidates, and resolutions debarring candidates from receiving awards based on revised results are unsustainable and arbitrary.
Point of Law – Courts will interfere only if they find all or any of the following: (i) violation of any enactment, statutory Rules and Regulations; (ii) mala fides or ulterior motives to assist or e....
The court established that new educational regulations can supersede previous ones, and students do not have a vested right to evaluation standards that have changed.
The absence of a provision for re-evaluation in the Rules cannot be challenged unless there are grounds to show that the policy itself is in violation of some statutory provision. Re-evaluation of ex....
The 2023 Guidelines supersede previous regulations, prohibiting the awarding of grace marks in MBBS examinations, emphasizing the court's limited role in academic policy matters.
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
