Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Aug 11: Division Bench of the State High Court comprising Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sanjeev Kumar has said that Jammu University enjoys the powers to rectify any mistake in the marks within a period of six months and re-evaluation and rectification have different objectives clearly defined under statutes.
These observations were made by the Division Bench while quashing the order dated June 8, 2017 passed by the Single Judge in case titled Apoorva Koul Versus University of Jammu.
Apoorva Koul, who was the student of second year of BCA course, secured 292 out of 550 marks in the annual examination conducted in the year 2015. Being dissatisfied, she applied for re-evaluation in three subjects—English, MF-A and CF-A, the result of which was declared on October 4, 2015.
In the re-evaluation, three marks in English Paper-B were increased a a result of which she was shown to have secured 295 out of 550 marks. However, marks obtained by her in respect of other subjects remained unchanged. On re-checking of the result, it was detected that the marks of other candidates were wrongly awarded to Apoorva Koul.
Accordingly, in exercise of Statute-61 of the University Statutes, the mistake was rectified and result of some of the candidates including Apoorva Koul was amended and formal notification was issued in this regard by which she was required to re-appear in MF and CF subjects.
She, however, challenged amended result and the Single Judge vide order dated June 8, 2017 quashed the notification dated September 28, 2015. University of Jammu challenged the judgement of Single Judge before the Division Bench.
Advocate Wasim Sadiq Nargal appearing for the University of Jammu submitted before the DB that when it came to the notice of the University that marks of other students were awarded to Apoorva Koul the mistake was rectified in exercise of powers under Statute 61. However, this aspect of the matter has escaped consideration of Single Judge.
After hearing Advocate Wasim Sadiq Nargal for University and Advocate Anshuja Tak appearing for Apoorva Koul, the DB observed, “University was well within its right to rectify the mistake which had crept in awarding marks to the respondent within a period of six months”, adding “mere non-communication of the marks obtained by the respondent to the college or institution concerned within three weeks of the publication of result would have no bearing on the result of the respondent”.
“The instant case is a case of rectification and the Statute 61 has rightly been resorted to by the University”, the DB said, adding “re-evaluation and rectification have different objectives clearly defined in the statutes”.
With these observations, DB quashed the order of the Single Judge.
Follow our WhatsApp channel