ASHA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short but intersting question arises for decision in this writ petition about the interpretation of the rules relating to giving of grace marks at the departmental examination conducted by the Education Department of the State of Rajasthan.

(2.) THE petitioner is a third grade to cher employed in the education Department of the State of Rajasthan. In the year 1970 he appeared at the B.S.T.C. examination held by the Registrar, Departmental Examinations, of the Education Deppartment, Rajasthan. The Petitioner was successful in all other subject except in the subject of Educational Psychology and Health Education with the result that he was declared to have failed at the BSTC examination, 1970. In the aforesaid subject, out of a total of 100 marks, 25 marks were meant for internal assessment, while 75 marks were assigned to external examination. According to the rules governing the said departmental examination the candidate was required to obtain atleast 25% marks in the external examination while he was required to obtain 33% marks in the aggregate of internal and external examination. In the subject of Educational Psychology and Health Education, the petitioner got 12 marks in the internal assessment while he obtained 17 marks in the external paper and thus, he obtained only 29 marks out of 100 in the aggregate in the aforesaid subject. The petitioner thus fell short of 2 marks only in the external paper of Educational Psychology while he was short by 4 marks in the aggregate of the internal examinations, in the subject of Education Psychology. There is no dispute between the parties that the petitioner had failed to secure the minimum pass marks in the external paper required at the aforesaid examination, which was 19 and he also failed to secure the minimum 33% marks in the aggregate in the subject of Educational Psychology.

(3.) THE grace marks Rules, therefore, make it abundantly clear that the candidate can be given grace marks upto a maximum of 5, according to the table referred to above, in the external paper, but it would only be a notional increase in the particular subject or subjects and would not be added to the total marks obtained by the candidate in the examination and further that only as many grace marks would be necessary for the candidate, to pass. In the case of the petitioner, the aggregate marks obtained by him exceed the minimum pass marks by 43 marks and as such the petitioner was entitled to maximum 5 grace marks, or as many grace marks to the limit of 5 marks as might be necessary for him to pass the examination. However, if only four grace marks would have been given to the petitioner in the external paper relating to Education Psychology and Health Education, then he would be deemed to have obtained 21 marks in that paper and 33 marks in all, in the subject of Educational Psychology, with the result that he would have passed in the subject and in the examination as well.