Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 10301
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
SRI MAHENDRA S – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) – Respondent
WP 7950 of 2025
Students should not be penalized for clerical errors made by educational institutions, and fairness must prevail in academic evaluations.
Headnote:(A) Examination Ordinance, 2011 - Internal Assessment Marks - The petitioner sought correction of internal assessment marks from 12 to 22 due to a clerical error by the college, which was acknowledged by the college. The University denied the request citing no provision for correction. (Paras 8-12)
(B) Fairness in Academic Evaluation - The court emphasized that students should not be penalized for clerical errors made by educational institutions, and that fairness must prevail in academic evaluations. (Paras 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, having completed a BCA course, discovered that internal assessment marks were incorrectly recorded, affecting his eligibility for further studies. The college admitted the error and sought correction from the University.
Findings of Court:
The court found the University’s refusal to correct the marks unjustified and ordered the correction to be made.
Issues: The main issue was whether the University should be directed to correct the internal assessment marks due to a clerical error acknowledged by the college.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the University’s rigid interpretation of regulations did not account for clerical errors and that fairness in academic evaluation must be upheld.
Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the University is directed to correct the marks and issue the marks card.
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:
Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent university to consider letter date:11.05.2024, a copy of which is produced at Annexure -N and thereby a direction may be issued to respondent Bangalore university for rectification of Internal Assessments of the petitioner in subject CSC5.3 Computer Science VI for the 5th semester has been wrongly entered in the marks card as 12 instead of 21, to meet the ends of justice.
(ii) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1 and learned AGA for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the judgment of this Court in the case of Sri. Srikanth B.S vs. The Registrar (Evaluation), Bengaluru University and another at Annexure - Q, wherein it is held as under :
The petitioner is seeking to quash the letter dated 06.07.2024 issued by respondent No.1-Bangalore University at Annexure-L and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to correct the marks as claimed in the letter dated 17.04.2024 issued by respondent No.2 at Annexure-K.
2. Brief facts that led to the filing of this petition are that the petitioner enrolled in the BCA course at Acharya Institute of Graduate Studies. Respondent No.2 completed the BCA course in August 2021. The petitioner passed the I Semester with one subject “Problem Solving Techniques Using C” in June-July 2021 with 22 marks in the internal assessment and the provision result declared showed “clear in that subject”, the same can be found place at Annexure-P of the writ petition. The petitioner later on appeared for the Karnataka Examination Authority’s, Post Graduate Common Entrance Test (PGCET) for MBA admission, the petitioner completed his MBA in digital marketing and was awarded MBA certificate. The petitioner was issued a study certificate by the Acharya Institute on 27.12.2021. However, the I and the VI semester marks card were not issued despite several requests and the petitioner made a representation to the institute for the I and VI semester marks card. It was at that time, the petitioner found that the internal assessment marks for the subject “Problem Solving Techniques Using C” were entered incorrectly as ‘12’ instead of ‘22’, which the petitioner had originally secured. This being the fact the respondent No.2-college sought to correct the mistake by writing a letter to respondent No.1 – Bangalore University on 07.04.2024. The respondent No.1 issued an endorsement / letter refusing to correct the internal assessment marks on the ground that once the internal marks was submitted in the year 2017, no changes could be made, which finds place at Annexure-L. The petitioner aggrieved by the endorsement issued by the Bangalore University is before this court.
3. Statement of facts have been filed by respondent No.2- college stating and admitting that the petitioner had secured 22 marks out of 30 marks in the internal assessment in the I semester of BCA for the subject i.e., “Problem Solving Techniques Using C” by the respondent No.2-College and in respect of the internals conducted by the respondent No.1-University, petitioner had scored 25 marks out of 70 marks, thereby securing a total of 47 marks out of 100 marks in the said subject. It is stated that the petitioner completed the BCA course during the month August 2021 with II Class and the petitioner approached respondent No.2 seeking issuance of original marks card of the I and VI semester stating that the petitioner needs the original marks card for the purpose of securing MBA seat with another institution. In the meantime, to facilitate
