NIKHIL SHARMA Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, then a student of B.A. (Prog.) Course in the respondent no.2 Deshbandhu Gupta College, instituted this writ petition being aggrieved of the omission on the part of the respondent no.2 College and the respondent no.1 University of Delhi of which the College is an affiliate, to incorporate the marks obtained by the petitioner in the internal assessment in the subject of Hindi-A for the year 2006-07. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 6th October, 2009 with a direction to the College to produce all the relevant records relating to the internal assessment of the petitioner in the subject aforesaid before the Controller of Examinations of the University and the Controller of the Examinations was directed to after examination of the record and verifying the internal assessment of the petitioner in the said subject, pass appropriate orders incorporating the marks obtained by the petitioner.

(2.) This application was necessitated by the petitioner because according to the petitioner, the respondent no.1 University while so correcting the mark sheet of the petitioner pursuant to the order aforesaid, has included only 7 marks instead of 17 marks awarded to him in the internal assessment. Notice of the application was issued to the respondent no.2 College and the respondent no.1 University. The respondent no.2 College has filed a reply stating inter alia that out of 25 internal assessment marks, 10 marks are allocated to House Examination, 10 marks for assessment of the assigned work and 5 for attendance; that the petitioner was awarded 4.5 marks in the House Examination, 5 for attendance and 7.2 for assignments making a total of 16.7 which was rounded off to 17. The respondent no.1 University however, while correcting the mark sheet of the petitioner applicant has not included the said 7.2 marks awarded by the College for assignments, for the reason of the respondent no.2 College having been unable to produce the assignment of the petitioner. The College in its reply to the application has further stated that as per the Internal Assessment Scheme framed by the respondent no.1 University, the assignment scripts are not to be retained and only the House Examination scripts are to be retained.

(3.) The respondent no.1 University in its reply has contended that since the respondent no.2 College failed to show the assignments of the petitioner, the 7.2 marks out of 10 in internal assignment awarded by the respondent no.2 College to the petitioner were not considered and hence not included.