'Momentary Lapse, Can't Affect Future Perversely': Delhi HC Grants Relief To NIFT Aspirant Who Inadvertently Disclosed Identity In Entrance Exam

The Delhi High Court has observed that a momentary lapse on the part of the candidate must not be met with such a severe punitive action which would cause grave and irreparable prejudice and affect the candidate's future perversely.

Justice Sanjeev Narula granted relief to a candidate namely Samriddhi Khandelwal by directing National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT) to allow her to join the counselling on the basis of her results of the online invigilated or remote proctored NIFT Entrance Exam, 2022.

The said Exam was divided into two parts – a written exam which was held on 06th February and a Situation Test which was to be held from 2nd April 2022 onwards.

The petitioner candidate had appeared for the online exam on 06th February 2022 from her residence, as per specifications mentioned in the Admit Card, complying with Rules and Regulations for Online Invigilated / Remote Proctored NIFT Entrance Exam for Admissions 2022.

She was then declared as "disqualified" in respect of the CAT exam, in the declaration of result dated 9th March, 2022. Aggrieved by the same, the petition was filed seeking directions on NIFT to publish and declare her in pursuance of the entrance exam for admission to bachelor of design course. The plea also sought directions on NIFT to allow her to participate in Situation Test (second round).

While the Court allowed the plea, it was of the view that it cannot enter the mind of the Petitioner to establish her bona fides, however, it was satisfied that she had come with clean hands and had repeatedly admitted to the lapse on her part while clicking photos and uploading the PDFs in the said exam.

"The Court is also mindful of the fact that due to the advent of COVID-19 pandemic, the structure of examinations has certainly undergone a monumental change, rendering both students and educational institutions alike, struggling to cope-up with the challenges posed by a complete shift to the virtual world. The consequences of such an upheaval have deep implications, and the instant petition is just one of the many issues that have been flagged as a by-product of this shift," the Court observed.

It was the case of NIFT that the Petitioner was rightly disqualified as she had disclosed the identity of the institute from which she was taking coaching for the exam, which was clearly visible from the PDF answer sheets uploaded by her to the online portal. Therefore, NIFT had argued that it was a case of her identity being disclosed in the examination, which was in violation of Rule 12 printed on the Admit Card.

In this backdrop, the Court was of the view:

"Though the afore-noted pictures reveal the name of the coaching institute, however, they do not indicate the identity of the candidate. This identification mark does not seem to violate condition no. 12 of the Admit Card, and for this reason alone, the Court is inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the Petitioner. Surely, the identification of a candidate can also be revealed by giving a hint or a suggestion, but that can occur if there is a nexus between the candidate and the examiner. However, such a case is not canvassed by the Respondent."

The Court also noted that there was no allegation against the Petitioner candidate of any malpractice or use of unfair means and that she was required to analyze the question and draw her answers on the questions-cum-answer sheets.

The Court also noted that the petitioner was then required to click pictures thereof, stitch them together into PDF files, and upload them on the portal, all within the stipulated time.

"It cannot be forgotten that the Petitioner is just a teenager, and given the enormity of appearing for an entrance exam which decides her career, coupled with the obligations of a new-format online system, it could have taken a toll on the Petitioner who was in a pinch of time. It is therefore plausible that due to paucity of time, towards the fag end of the exam, the Petitioner panicked and did not crop or properly click photographs of her answer sheets and hurriedly uploaded the same to conform with the deadline," it said.

The Court added "In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the view that a momentary lapse on the part of the candidate must not be met with such a severe punitive action, which would cause grave and irreparable prejudice and affect the Petitioner's future perversely."

The plea was accordingly allowed.

Case Title: SAMRIDDHI KHANDELWAL v. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FASHION TECHNOLOGY

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 582

Click Here To Read Order