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.

1.In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the impugned letter dated 14.1.2011 of the Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, whereby the University, while re - introducing the award of grace marks up to a maximum of five in theory papers, has informed that the same shall be awarded only in one subject or shall be distributed among the other two or three subjects, however no grace marks shall be awarded for practical examination for all courses. The operative portion of the impugned letter, which is in effect challenged, is as follows:

"1) RE - INTRODUCTION OF AWARD OF GRACE MARKS (UP TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MARKS IN THEORY PAPERS FOR UNDER GRADUATE & POST GRADUATE DEGREE / DIPLOMA AND SUPER SPECIALITY DEGREE COURSES.

The awarding of grace marks upto a maximum of five marks in theory papers to the students of Under - graduate. Post graduate in Medical, Dental, Indian Medicine and Homoeopathy, Allied Health Sciences and Super Specialty courses be re - introduced from February / April 2011 examination onwards. The grace marks of five (5) shall be awarded in one subject or shall be distributed among the other two or three subjects. No Grace marks shall be awarded for Practical Examination for all courses."

In all these cases, the petitioners have challenged the non grant of grace marks for practical examinations when the University has re - introduced the grant of grace marks.

2.2.1. The writ petitioner in W.P.No.14130 of 2011 has secured the following marks:

(a) 75% in the First year _ 78.75% in Anatomy (Distrinction), 76.75% in Biochemistry (Distinction and Gold Medalist) and 3rd Rank in the College,

(b) 71.07% in the Second year _ 72.2% in Microbiology, 71% in Pathology, 74% in Pharmacology and 63% in Forensic Medicine, and

(c) 70% in the Third year Part I _ 67% in Opthamology, 65.5% in E.N.T. and 73.75% in Community Medicine.

2.4. According to the petitioner, awarding of grace marks was in vogue earlier. Therefore, she has filed the present writ petition challenging the said portion of the guidelines and also for a direction against respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 to grant grace marks to the petitioner bearing Registration No.52065201 for the subject General Surgery - Clinical and declare her to have passed.

3.2. Thus, in Clinical Orthopedics, which is a practical paper, he has obtained 20 marks out of 50, while the requirement is 25 marks. Therefore, in the final year, in one paper, viz., practical paper, if he is given five marks, he will be able to complete the course. He was declared failed only based on the portion of the impugned guideline awarding grace marks only in respect of theory papers. Therefore, he has filed the present writ petition challenging the said portion of the guidelines and also for a direction against respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 to grant grace marks to the petitioner bearing Registration No.52061606 for the subject General Surgery - Clinical and declare him to have passed.

4.2. Thus, in Clinical Orthopedics, which is a practical paper, he has obtained 20 marks out of 50, while the requirement is 25 marks. Therefore, in the final year, in one paper, viz., practical paper, if he is given five marks, he will be able to complete the course. He was declared failed only based on the portion of the impugned guideline awarding grace marks only in respect of theory papers. Therefore, he has filed the present writ petition challenging the said portion of the guidelines and also for a direction against respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 to grant grace marks to the petitioner bearing Registration No.52061721 for the subject General Surgery - Clinical and declare him to have passed.  

5.2. Thus, in Clinical Orthopedics, which is a practical paper, he has obtained 20 marks out of 50, while the requirement is 25 marks. Therefore, in the final year, in one paper, viz., practical paper, if he is given five marks, he will