Anatomy of a Failure: Court Denies Plea for Fragmented Re-examination in PG Medical Courses
In a significant ruling concerning the standards of medical education, the has dismissed a petition filed by Dr. Salman Mahmood, a post-graduate student of M.D. Anesthesiology. The Court affirmed that under the Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 , failing a single theory paper mandates a complete re-appearance for all theory papers, along with practical and viva voce components.
The Backdrop: A One-Mark Discrepancy
The dispute arose following the petitioner's performance in the October 2025 final examinations conducted by the . Dr. Mahmood, having completed his M.D. tenure at , failed his "Paper-I: Basic Sciences and Applied Anatomy" by a narrow margin of one mark.
Contending that his failure was due to a technical lapse—specifically, that "Question No. 6" in his answer script was left unmarked and unassessed—the petitioner approached the High Court. While he had previously secured the right to inspect his answer scripts, the Court found that the lack of examiner notation did not constitute an invalid evaluation, leading the student to challenge the University’s insistence that he repeat the entire battery of examinations.
The Arguments: Interpretation vs. Doctrine
The Petitioner’s Stance: Dr. Mahmood argued that the relevant clause in the Regulations, 2023 —which dictates that students failing in one "head" must re-appear for theory and practical/viva voce—should be read narrowly. He maintained that “re-appearance” should be restricted only to the paper he failed, rather than mandating a complete do-over of the course requirements.
The University’s Defense: The stood firm on the sanctity
Post-graduate assessment - academic evaluation - mandatory re-appearance - regulatory framework - clinical competencies - summative assessment
