Orissa High Court Grants ₹5 Lakhs Compensation To +3 Student Wrongly Declared As 'Fail' By Sambalpur University In 1999

The Orissa High Court has ordered Sambalpur University to pay five-lakh rupees compensation to a student who was erroneously declared as 'fail' in his +3 examinations held in 1999.

While highlighting the delicate role played by the Universities in deciding the future of students, the Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi observed–

“Universities hold a significant responsibility towards their students, particularly in the efficient administration of examinations and the timely publication of results. These processes are fundamental to the academic journey of students and any lapse can have serious implications on their academic progress, career prospects, and overall well-being.”

Case Background

The petitioner appeared in the +3 Commerce examination in the year 1999 conducted by the Sambalpur University. He was declared as 'fail' in English scoring only 25 out of 100 marks, falling short of the passing score of 30. Also, despite attending, he was marked absent for the Commercial Law paper.

He again appeared for clearing the English paper and simultaneously sat for the final +3 Commerce Pass Examination. Despite appearing, he was marked absent for the English retake. He was shown to have scored 23 in Commercial Law, where he was previously marked 'absent'. His final exam result was withheld due to his 'absentee' status in the English retake.

It was averred that the petitioner sincerely tried to approach the University authorities time and again over a decade underlining the discrepancies in the marking made in his favour but all efforts went in vain. After undertaking many endeavours, the petitioner ultimately filed an application under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act in June 2012 requesting to supply the marks of his English paper.

Subsequent to the filing of RTI application, the University authorities responded with the 'pass' result of the petitioner which was claimed to be published just a month back. In that response, it was conveyed that the petitioner was declared 'fail' due to a missing mark entry from 1999.

Resultantly, the authorities clarified that the petitioner had in fact passed the examination but due to inadvertence, his result was wrongly declared as 'fail'.

Challenging such lackadaisical approach of the University, the petitioner knocked at the portals of the High Court claiming compensation for the academic and professional loss caused to him for more than decade delay.

Court's Observations

The Court opined that conducting examination involves proper scheduling, ensuring the availability of necessary resources, and maintaining an environment conducive to fair testing. Any discrepancies or inefficiencies can lead to undue stress and may not accurately reflect a student's capabilities.

It also stressed on timely publication of results as delay therein can cause anxiety and uncertainty among students. Justice Panigrahi said that discrepancy in publication of results has potential to hinder ability of students to make informed decisions about their future, such as applying for higher studies or jobs.

“If universities fail in these responsibilities, it can be argued that they should provide compensation to the affected students. This could be in the form of financial compensation, course credits, or other measures that acknowledge and rectify the inconvenience caused. Such a provision not only serves as a remedial measure but also underscores the accountability of educational institutions,” he added.

Considering the peculiar facts of the case in hand, the Court observed that recording an incorrect/wrong marks in the result of the petitioner and showing him 'Fail' and marking him absent in the exams in which he assiduously appeared, is totally an irresponsible act which had an adverse impact upon the career and future prospect of the petitioner.

For fixing responsibility of the University, the Court relied upon the decision of the Kerala High Court in University of Kerala v. Sandhya P. Pai, wherein it was held that Universities cannot seek to absolve responsibility citing lack of resources or man-power and they are duty bound to conduct examinations and other academic activities in responsible manner.

The Bench also placed reliance upon the order in Manoj Kumar & Anr. v. The State of Bihar, wherein the Patna High Court directed the Bihar School Examination Board to pay a monetary compensation of Rs. 2 Lakh to a girl who was wrongly declared 'fail' in a paper of the Secondary School Examination, 2017 (Annual) conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board.

Accordingly, having regard for the factual scenario as well as the aforesaid precedents, the Court ordered the University to pay compensation to the tune of ₹5 lakhs to the petitioner within three months.

Case Title: Bibhuti Bhusan Barik v. State of Orissa

Case No: WP(C) No. 649 of 2015

Date of Judgment: March 28, 2024

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Tanmay Mishra & Mr. S. Sourav, Advocates

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Sanjeev Udgata, Advocate

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ori) 23

Click Here To Read/Download Order