SATYA PAL SINGH Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both petitioner and.private Respondent No.3 took final examination in M.Sc.(Physics) way back in 1999. when the result was declared Respondent No.3 was shown to have secured first position and petitioner second. Petitioner challenged this and sought revaluation of his answer scripts. On revaluation he outscored respondent No.3 and then approached Respondent University for setting right the record. His plea was but rejected on the strength of the relevant University Regulation (14.22) which stipulated that results of an examination declared once could not be disturbed due to revaluation of candidates answer scripts. He has now filed this petition for striking down the relevant regulation which according to him was irrational and unreasonable generating absurd result, in the process.

(2.) On 14.8.2001 L/C for University, Mr. Sawhney sought adjournment to enable the University to have a second look at the impugned Regulation. He informed the court today that it had passed Resolution No.4 to make amends by making suitable modification in the Regulation which now provides that the position attained by a. student in the examination would not be indicated in the mark-sheet. However a certificate showing first, second and third positions would be issued to a student on the request after declaration of the revaluation results.

(3.) This clinches the issue and redresses the grievance because a candidates merit position would not be finalised after the result of an examination was declared. This renders it unnecessary to examine the validity of University Regulation 1 (14.22) which now stands appropriately amended. Mr.Sawhney, however, submited that amendment brought about was to operate prospectively as otherwise it could reopen other similar cases of previous years.