Asheesh Saini vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.
2002 Latest Caselaw 2154 Del

JUDGMENT

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Rule.

With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.

2. The petitioner has been pursuing the course of "Fashion Communication" at the National Institute of Fashion Technology/respondent No.2 herein. Petitioner had cleared the first two semesters. Petitioner while appearing in the third semester was declared unsuccessful in the subject of Graphic Design. Petitioner by this writ petition seeks, inter alia, a direction to the respondents to conduct re-examination in the subject of 'Graphic Design'. A direction is further sought that petitioner be evaluated or as sessed by an independent faculty, which would not be under the influence of respondents 2 and 3. Further directions are sought for introducing courses such as Specialization in Written Communication etc. The petitioner had also sought award of damages for mental agony, harassment etc.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the relief for introduction of the course "Specialization in Written Communication" or the prayer for award of damages. Petitioner confines his relief to re-examination in the subject of 'Graphic Design'.

4. Mr. Gagan Gupta, counsel for the petitioner, relies on the following clause in the Rules and Regulations of NIFT :-

"If the student does not obtain qualifying marks in the re-examination, he/she may be given one more chance to take the examination at the appropriate time."

5. In the instant case, petitioner did not submit his project for a subject 'Graphic Design'. The examination in the subject of Graphic Design was confined to submission of a project and its assessment. The petitioner was required to furnish the project on 4.2.2002. Petitioner failed to do so. On 5.02.2002 respondent advised the petitioner that he had not submitted the project and he may do so latest by 8.02.2002, failing which he would have to repeat the semester. The extension granted for submission of the project by 8.2.2002 regarded by the respondents as availing the opportunity for re-examination. In the event, respondent claims that petitioner submitted the project after 5.2.2002, but before 8.2.2002.

6. The question that arises for consideration is whether the extension of 3 days from 5.2.2002 to 8.2.2002 granted to the petitioner to submit the project amounts to availing of an opportunity to re-examination? It is not in dispute that as per the Regulations, a candidate is entitled to a chance even after failing in re-examination. In my view, the extension of 3 days cannot be regarded as an opportunity or availing of the provision for re-examination. The whole purpose of re-examination is that the examinee gets some time to reappear after a gap to improve his chances. This would defeat the very purpose and intent of re-examination, there being sufficient time gap between the two. Learned counsel for respondent states that they have a practice whereby an extension granted in submitting the project is regarded as a re-examination since the examinee on failure to submit the project technically stands failed and disqualified. It appears to me that respondents, if so permissible under the Rules and in their discretion, can grant an extension if so warranted based on the circumstances of individual case to the student to complete the project. This would be a matter of policy and discretion of respondents. However, such an extension cannot be treated as or given the colour or label of re-examination.

7. In view of the foregoing discussion, writ petition is allowed to the extent that respondents shall give another chance to the petitioner to submit his project on Graphic Design. Counsel for the respondents states that petitioner may appear before Dr. Batra, Head of the Academic Affairs on 19.12.2002 at 10AM for assignment of the project, which the petitioner would be required to submit within 2 weeks. Respondents shall evaluate the project and make the assessment. Based on the result, if the petitioner is successful in third semester, he would be entitled to pursue his studies for 4th semester commencing January, 2003. Respondents shall expeditiously complete the assessment of the project, so that based on the result and as per the rules, petitioner can pursue his next semester.

Writ petition is allowed in the above terms.