MAHUA NAG Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR OF CALCUTTA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An unsuccessful student, Who appeared in the Final year LL.B. Examination, 1996 held in May 1997, has filed this writ petition by raising a dispute with regard to her result of the said Examination.

(2.) The petitioner appeared in LL.B. Part-l Examination (5-Year Course) in the year 1992 but became unsuccessful. The petitioner again appeared in the LL.B. Part-l Examination in 1993 as a supplementary candidate along with LL.B. Part-ll Examination. The petitioner again became unsuccessful in both Part-l Supplementary Examination as well as in Part-ll Examination. Subsequently, the petitioner again appeared in LL.B. Part-l Examination in the year 19.94. This time, however, the petitioner became successful. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in LL.B. Part-Ill Examination along with the LL.B. Part-ll Supplementary Examination in 1995. However, the publication of the result of the petitioner of Part-ll and Part-Ill LL.B. Examination was kept withheld by the University on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible to appear in LL.B. Part-Ill Examination along with the LL.B. Part-ll Supplementary Examination in 1995 underthe extant Examination Regulation. However, pursuant to a special permission granted by the Pro-Vice Chancellor (Academic), the petitioner was allowed to appear in LL.B. Part-IV Examination in the year 1996. But since the petitioner could not pass the said Examination, her result of LL.B. Part-Ill Examination was withheld. Subsequently, however, in terms of a special permission granted by the respondent No. 1, the results of the Part-Ill and Part-IV Examinations of the petitioner were released pending publication of the result of her LL.B. Part-ll Examination.

(3.) In the aforesaid background, there was some delay in publication of the result of the petitioner by the University concerned. The result of LL.B. Part-IV Examination, 1996 was published on 23rd September, 1997. But the petitioner ultimately received the mark sheet of the LL.B. Part-IV Examination on 17th April, 1998, i.e., after expiry of about six and half months from the date of publication of the result. After obtaining the mark sheet of the said Examination, the petitioner found that the'marks, which were given to her in different subjects of the said Examination, were much below than her expectation. The petitioner became very much suspicious about the evaluation of her answer scripts and accordingly the petitioner intended to apply for scrutiny of her answer scripts of the said Examination but the University authority refused to accept the application for scrutiny from the petitioner.