High Court slams Panjab University for arbitrary reduction of marks
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has castigated Panjab University for arbitrarily scaling down a law student’s marks without any legal basis. The Bench also imposed Rs 1 lakh costs on the varsity for jeopardising the petitioner’s academic career.
Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri observed the petitioner, a student enrolled in Panjab University’s five-year integrated law course in 2016, appeared for the “Land Law and Rent Laws” paper in May 2023 as a re-appear candidate.
According to the university’s rules at the time of the petitioner’s admission, the passing criterion required a 45 per cent aggregate of theory and internal assessment marks. In the May 2023 examination, the petitioner secured 54 out of 80 marks in the theory paper. However, the internal assessment marks were zero. Despite securing more than the required 45 per cent in the theory paper, the varsity failed the petitioner by arbitrarily reducing the marks from 54 to 41, applying an outdated formula.
Justice Puri, during the course of hearing, posed pointed queries to the varsity’s Registrar and Controller of Examinations regarding legal basis for converting the petitioner’s marks. The Bench was then told reduction was done purely on the basis of “past practice”.
“The only answer, which they have given to this court, is that it is a past practice and by virtue of the same, they have been converting the criteria/formula for assessment of marks of their own at the clerical and superintendent level but there are no instructions or any provision of law of university,” Justice Puri asserted.
The court observed the scaling down of marks of a student passing an 80 marks examination by securing 54 marks was required to be conducted in accordance with a formula prescribed by relevant laws. The officers present in the court, and varsity counsel, stated that no formula had been established, nor was there any law or source of authority, which granted its examination department the power to exercise such authority.
Justice Puri observed: “It was on whims and fancies that the university converted the marks of the petitioner and reduced the same which resulted in the petitioner failing in one paper... Such an action of respondent-university, which had an effect on the student’s career, is not only illegal and perverse, but it is also deprecated by this court”
Justice Puri added the varsity was well aware that the petitioner ought to have been given theory paper of 60 marks, but was given paper of 80 marks to “avoid their own workload”. The consequence was that the petitioner’s marks were reduced by scaling it down from 54 to 41, resulting in less than 45 per cent marks and failed the petitioner. “Such scaling down by the administrative staff of examination branch was without any provision or authority of law”
Justice Puri directed the Vice-Chancellor would look into this issue and take corrective measures within two months from today. The exemplary costs, in the nature of compensation, would be paid by the varsity to the petitioner within the same period the Vice-Chancellor would be at liberty to conduct an inquiry, fix responsibility, and be at liberty to recover the costs from the officials concerned in accordance with law.
What court observed
The court observed the scaling down of marks of a student passing an 80 marks examination by securing 54 marks was required to be conducted in accordance with a formula prescribed by relevant laws. The officers stated that no formula had been established, which granted its examination department the power to exercise such authority.
