Examiners Of RGUHS Flouting Exam Guidelines, Students Forced To Take Repeat Tests: Karnataka High Court Recommends Disciplinary Action
The Karnataka High Court has suggested to the Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences to take action against delinquent examiners in-charge of conducting Clinical Examinations for MBBS and MD courses, who are routinely found violating the guidelines issued by the University. A single judge bench of Justice P Krishna Bhat said,"It is necessary to observe that examiners appointed by...
The Karnataka High Court has suggested to the Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences to take action against delinquent examiners in-charge of conducting Clinical Examinations for MBBS and MD courses, who are routinely found violating the guidelines issued by the University.
A single judge bench of Justice P Krishna Bhat said,
"It is necessary to observe that examiners appointed by the respondent- University seem to be routinely violating the guidelines issued by the University for holding the Clinicals examination. As a matter of fact, the learned counsel brought to my notice the order dated 22-12-2020 in Writ Appeal No.615 of 2020 (EDN-RES) (Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences V. Mr. Ramegowda Y. And Others), wherein also this Court had an occasion to notice such malpractice and direct re-conduct of practical examinations."
Further it said, "It is now time that the respondent-University wakes up to reality and proceeds to take action against delinquent examiners by blacklisting them or by holding departmental proceedings so that this kind of malpractices do not recur."
It added, "Future conduct of examination is concerned, the respondent-University shall take precautionary measures and ensure that malpractices do not take place causing the students to take examination over and over. It is open to the respondent-University to devise procedural safeguards to ensure compliance of the directions in this order."
Case Background:
Petitioner Dasari Chakradhar and Shashi Kumar are Phase III - Part II (4th year) MBBS students who have taken supplementary examinations for four subjects each in October 2021 held by the respondent-University.
On account of examiners appointed by the respondent- University acting in violation of the Guidelines for the Conduct of Clinical Examinations for MBBS examinations- October 2020 the petitioners were shown as failed in the examinations and on account of the same, they were made to take examinations as repeaters, which is illegal.
Court findings:
Firstly, the court noted that it is crystal clear that as per the Guidelines aforementioned which is binding on the respondent- University for the conduct of Clinical examinations, each of the four examiners holding Clinical examinations are required to make an entry of the marks awarded by them (Short case, Long case) in the answer booklet furnished to them.
The court then went through the practical answer booklets of the two petitioners and observed ,"With regard to both petitioners, practical answer booklets are left blank."
Further the court said ,"Guidelines issued are a procedural framework provided by the respondent-University for the purpose of assessing the performance of the candidates and in this case, examiners have demonstrably failed to abide by the said procedure."
It added, "These guidelines are not mere superfluous verbiage for filling the pages of a Brochure of the University. It is a framework of solemn significance with regard to conduct of Clinical examinations in fulfilment of the course content of MBBS studies."
Following which the court remarked ,
"It is not unoften that students of MBBS and MD courses complain about the malpractices by those in-charge of conduct of Clinical examinations. One of the most frequently heard complaints is that the Professors in-charge of the Clinicals often form a narrow syndicate for helping or salvaging the careers of favoured candidates and scuttling the careers of those who are out of favour with them. It is precisely to keep the streams of Clinicals examination unpolluted, the guidelines have been framed to make the entries of marks awarded by each of the examiners then and there separately."
The court then observed, "Since the assessment, as per the practical answer booklet, is not made in accordance with the procedural guidelines as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners in these cases, it is open to be contended that the examiners did not actually assess the performance of the petitioners and the same was filled up later by someone else.
It held,
"In the circumstances, it is unjust on the part of the respondent-University to treat the petitioners as repeaters in spite of the petitioners participating in examinations held for October-2021 and therefore, they should be permitted to take up the examinations again and result shall not be taken as that of repeaters. In other words, it is required to be treated by the respondent-University as a result of examinations of October-2021."
Accordingly the court allowed the petitions and directed the University to hold fresh practical examinations for failed subjects of Surgery and Paediatrics respectively for the petitioners within three weeks'.
Case Title: Dasari Chakradhar V The Registrar (Evaluation)
Case No: W.P. NO.1120/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 88
Date of Order: 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
Appearance: Advocate ABHISHEK MALIPATIL for petitioner; Advocate FARAH FATHIMA for respondent
Click Here To Read/Download Order