The High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition seeking relief of 'mercy chance' or grace marks. The petitioner, a B.A.S.L.P. student, failed her second-semester exam thrice. The Court held that since she could not reach the final year examination stage where such benefits apply under Regulation 5, she was not eligible.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~96
SAKSHI KUMARI ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Mrinal Ecker Mazumdar, Ms. Aarushi Gupta and Mr. Divyansh Singh, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, ASC for GGSIPU Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Ms. Nidhi Mittal and Ms. Gauri Goburdhan, Advs. for UGC/R-4
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
ORDER (ORAL) % 08.05.2024
1. The issue in controversy in the present writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to be awarded grace marks or to a “mercy chance” so as to tide over having failed in the Otolaryngology paper in the second semester of her B. ASLP1 course undertaken with the Respondent 1 University (hereinafter referred to as “the University”).
2. Consequent to clearing the Common Entrance Test (CET) 2020 held by the University, the petitioner joined the B. ASLP course in the Ali Yavar Jung National Institute of Speech and Hearing Disabilities (Divyangjan) [hereinafter referred to as “the Institute”]. The course spans four years. The petitioner is therefore a student of the 2020-
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 1 of 7 By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
2024 batch.
3. In June 2022, the petitioner appeared for her second semester regular examinations. She failed her Otolaryngology paper in which she scored 28 marks against the minimum pass marks of 37.5. She reappeared in the said paper in April 2023, the result of which was declared on 10 April 2023. She again failed, scoring 30 marks in her second attempt. She undertook her third attempt of her second semester in her Otolaryngology paper in December 2023. As per the result which was announced on 25 January 2024, the petitioner again failed, scoring 32 marks against the requisite 37.5 pass marks.
4. As a result of the University refusing to award her grace marks, the petitioner is unable to appear for the sixth semester exams and continue with her studies.
5. It is also pointed out that the petitioner has been unable to clear the subject “Child Language Disorders” in her fourth semester examination. However, if the petitioner is not awarded 5.5 grace marks and is not promoted to her sixth semester, she would never be able to re-appear in the said papers thereby rendering nugatory the provision for three attempts at every paper, specified in Clause 8.1 of the norms of the Rehabilitation Council of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘RCI’) for the B. ASLP course, which reads thus:
“8.1 Carry-over of papers
Each paper should be successfully completed within 3 attempts
Signature Not Verified1 Bachelor in Audiology and Speech Language Pathology Course
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 2 of 7 By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
including the first one.
Students can start internship after the 6th semester exams. However, students who fail in their clinical exam of 6th semester will have to discontinue internship. The candidates are permitted to carry over the theory courses until the end of the program.”
6. The second prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is that she be granted 5.5 grace marks for his Otolaryngology paper in her third attempt.
7. The award of grace marks, at the relevant time, was regulated by the “Regulation for Grace Marks in the University Examinations” of the University, circulated on 19 December 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 Regulations”) as approved by the Board of Management of the University in its 55th meeting held on 24 September 2013. Regulations 1, 4, 5 and 6 of the 2013 Regulations are relevant and may be reproduced thus :
a) After n years:
Six grace marks may be awarded after completion of
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 3 of 7 By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
the normal duration of the course (n semester/annuals etc.), only if this enables the student to become eligible for the award of degree (i.e. after n semesters/years).
b) After n+1 years:
Nine grace marks to be awarded after n+1 year, only if this enables the student to become eligible for the award of degree.
c) After n+2 years:
Twelve grace marks to be awarded after n+2 years, only if this enables the student to become eligible for the award of degree.
8. This case is fully covered by the judgment dated 6 May 2024 passed by this Court in Raj Gangwani v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University2 .
9. Ms. Aarushi Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, made sincere efforts to extricate her client from the said decision but it has to be said that her effort, though sincere, are not successful.
10. She first referred to para 35 of the decision in Raj Gangwani , which reads thus:
“35. The petitioner’s prayer for grant of a mercy chance is also, according to Mr. Sabharwal, unjustified, as the petitioner’s case is not one in which, owing to unavoidable circumstances, he was not in a position to attempt the papers. The petitioner attempted the Communication Sciences paper not once but thrice and failed each time. There can, therefore, be no question of grant of any mercy
2 Order dated 6 May 2024 in WP(C) 1506/2024
Signature Not Verified 2
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
Page 4 of 7
chance to him.”
11. Ms. Gupta submits that the case of her client is different from that of Raj Gangwani .
12. A reading of the decision in Raj Gangwani reveals that the prayer for grant of mercy chance was rejected, not just on the ground that the petitioner was unable to appear in the paper owing to unavoidable circumstances, but also on other grounds which Ms. Gupta is not able to distinguish.
13. Inter alia , this Court has noted that the grant of a mercy chance is matter of discretion of the Vice Chancellor and that, unless the court is satisfied that the said discretion has been misused or abused, it cannot sit in an appeal over the exercise thereof.
14. That apart, Mr. Sabharwal has pointed out, correctly, that the petitioner had submitted an application dated 2 February 2024 to the Institute, seeking grant of grace marks and stating that she was unavoidably late for her Otolaryngology examination owing to an unexpected emergency, as her mother was admitted to hospital requiring immediate attention. He points out that, while the examination was held in December 2023, the medical records submitted with the applications are all between 19 September 2018 and 28 July 2023. There is, therefore, no medical record submitted by the petitioner to the institute, evidencing that her mother was seriously
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verifiedunwell or hospitalised even proximate to the date of the examination
Digitally Signed By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
Page 5 of 7
for which she seeks a mercy chance.
15. The second submission of Ms. Gupta is that, in Raj Gangwani , the petitioner had not yet entered the sixth semester and, therefore, this Court was not inclined to extend, to him, the benefit of the 2013 Regulations.
16. As against this, her client, she submits, was actually studying in the sixth semester. This factor, too, can make no difference, as Regulation 5, as I have held in Raj Gangwani, applies only with respect to the nth semester examinations, i.e. the examinations held at the end of the nth year, at the cusp of obtaining a degree.
17. Regulation 5 in fact is a beneficial provision introduced so as to facilitate the obtaining of a degree by student who may have not been able to obtain the requisite marks in the last examination at the end of nth year. In such a case, the student is entitled to two opportunities to re-attempt the examination, at the end of n+1 year and at the end of n+2 years. The regulation also provides that, at the first attempt, undertaken at the end of nth year, six grace marks may be awarded; at the second examination conducted at the end of n+1 year, 9 grace marks may be awarded and at the second re-test at the end of n+2 years, 12 grace marks may be awarded.
18. A student who has not reached the stage of attempting the nth year examination, cannot, therefore, seek the benefit of Regulation 5.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 6 of 7 By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
19. Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed the Otolaryngology paper of her second semester thrice, she would not be in a position to undertake the nth year examination. As such, the benefit of Regulation 5 of the 2013 Regulations cannot be extended to the petitioner.
20. There is, therefore, no distinguishing feature as would justify this Court adopting, in the present case, a view any different from that which it took in Raj Gangwani .
21. As such, following the judgment of this Court in Raj Gangwani, this writ petition is dismissed in limine .
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
MAY 8, 2024
dsn
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 7 of 7 By:CHANDRASHEKHAR AN HARI SHANKAR Signing Da te:13 .05.2024 22:57
Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR WP(C) 6287/2024 Signing Date:13.0 5.20 24 22:58
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to grace marks or a mercy chance to appear for the sixth semester exams after failing multiple times.
Whether Regulation 5 of the University's grace marks regulations applies to a student who failed the second semester thrice and is barred from proceeding to the final year.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raj Gangwani v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha UniversityFollowed¶20
Raj Gangwani v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University
Sakshi Kumari
Union of India
C. Hari Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
