Kumari Kini Dixit Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - in case a candidate has failed in practical he/she shall have to appear in theory and practical both irrespective of the fact that he/she has already cleared the theory examination. the candidate will be declared 'pass' provided he/she qualifies the compartmental subject in which he/she had failed. the scheme clearly provides that there shall be three chances given to the candidates. the scheme is simply that a person who has passed himself in the required subjects may carry forward the subject in which he has failed and on a second attempt may secure the required grade to save the time which otherwise may go waste. reading the central board secondary education scheme of examination and pass criteria it would clearly appear that the compartment is treated to be a second or.....orderr.s. garg, j. 1. by this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india the petitioner seeks relief that the respondents be commanded to treat the petitioner qualified as per rule 2.4.1 of the p.p.t. rules and the respondents be commanded to grant opportunity to the petitioner to appear in the councilling and she be given admission in p.p.t. course 1998 in the college as per her merits in the list.2. brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are; that the petitioner took up her examination for session 1997-98 of 10th class conducted by the central board of secondary education. it appears that she could not clear all the subjects in the first attempt therefore, in hindi course a she was given compartment. after appearing in the examination the petitioner also.....

Judgment:
ORDER

R.S. Garg, J.

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks relief that the respondents be commanded to treat the petitioner qualified as per Rule 2.4.1 of the P.P.T. Rules and the respondents be commanded to grant opportunity to the petitioner to appear in the councilling and she be given admission in P.P.T. course 1998 in the college as per her merits in the list.

2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are; that the petitioner took up her examination for session 1997-98 of 10th class conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. It appears that she could not clear all the subjects in the first attempt therefore, in Hindi course A she was given compartment. After appearing in the examination the petitioner also took up examination of Pre-Polytechnic test (PPI) 1998 which is in fact a entrance test conducted by the Professional Examination Board, M. P. The petitioner passed in the PPT examination and could secure 68.48%. It appears that before the petitioner took part in the councilling she had taken compartment examinations and she was declared passed. In the councilling dated 16-9-98 it was observed by the committee that as the petitioner has not passed in the main examination she was not entitled to be admitted to thecourse of PPT, they accordingly refused to grant her admission. Being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed this petition.

3. The submission of Shri Kohli learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to the Scheme of examinations and pass criteria of the Central Board of Secondary Education a person would be declared pass if he obtained a grade higher than E (i.e. at least 33% marks) in all the subjects offered of external examination in the main or at the compartmental examination therefore, compartmental examination would be a part of the main examination and could not be treated as second or subsequent examination. He further submits that according to paragraph 2.5 of the said scheme a person is entitled to the compartment examinations if he has passed in the required subjects but fails or does not obtain required mark in one particular subject. According to him paragraph 2.4.1 of the P.P.T. entrance policy could not be used against her because the petitioner did not take any subsequent examination nor had appeared in any succeeding or supplementary examinations. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as marks of the compartments are to be substituted for the marks of the original examinations it must be deemed that the result is substituted and as such paragraph 2.4.1 would not be a bar to admission for the present petitioner. Shri J. P. Agarwal learned counsel for the State and Shri Rakesh Shroti for respondent No. 2 vehemently opposing the petition submits that the petitioner is confusing himself in the main examination and the compartment examinations. According to them the phraseology and the note appended to paragraph 2.4.1 would make it abanduntly clear that the candidate is required to pass in the main examination taken by the candidate and not in any subsequent examination, be it a compartment, supplementary or subsequent examination. To jettison the arguments of Shri Kohli it was contended that Rule 2.4.1 on its fair reading would make it clear that a person who had not passed in the main examination, which would mean the first examination, then he would not be entitled to admission in the course.

4. I have heard the parties at length.

5. Undisputedly the petitioner appeared in the examination of 10th class conducted by CentralBoard of Secondary Education. The scheme of examinations and pass criteria has been produced before me by Shri Kohli for perusal. Paragraph 2.5 of the said scheme provides that in order to be declared as having passed the examination, a candidate shall obtain a grade higher then E (i.e. at least 33% marks) in all the five subjects of external examination in the main or at the compartmental examination. The pass marks in each subject of external examination shall be 33%. In case of a subject involving practical work a candidate must obtain 33% marks in theory and 33% marks in practical separately in addition to 33% marks in aggregate in order to qualify in that subject. Paragraph 2.7 (v) of the scheme provides that for subjects involving practical work, in case the candidate has passed in practical at the main examination, he/she shall appear only in theory part and previous practical marks will be carried forward and accounted for. In case a candidate has failed in practical he/she shall have to appear in theory and practical both irrespective of the fact that he/she has already cleared the theory examination. A conjoint reading of paragraph 2.5 (ii) with paragraph 2.7(v) would show that a person is required to obtain at least 33% marks in all the subjects in the external examinations and if he has offered a subject which involves practical examination then he has to pass separately in both the examinations i.e. practical and theory examinations. If he falls in practical examination, theory marks would not be carried forward and he will have to take both the examination afresh but if he passes in the practical examinations then those marks would be carried and such candidate would be required to appear in theory examinations only.

6. Paragraph 2.7(i) of the said scheme provides that a candidate placed in compartment may reappear at the compartmental examination to be held in July/August and may avail himself/ herself of the second chance in March/April next year. The candidate will be declared 'pass' provided he/she qualifies the compartmental subject in which he/she had failed. The scheme simply provides that a candidate has to appear in all the five subjects of external examination in the main examination or at the compartmental examination. The scheme clearly provides that there shall be three chances given to the candidates. In the main if he clears in all the subjects securing agrade higher than E then he would be declared pass but if he does not secure required marks in one subject then he would be given compartment which opportunity he may use in July/August and if does not clear in this then he may carry the subjects till March/April next year. The scheme does not say that the compartmental examination are part of the main examination. The scheme provides that there shall be one examination and thereafter there shall be compartmental examination and if a candidate does not clear in the August examination then a further chance would be given to him in April next year for securing pass marks. Paragraph 2.5(ii) uses the language as under 'a candidate shall obtain a grade higher then E in all the five subjects of the external examinations in the main or at the compartmental examinations'. The intention of the scheme is absolutely clear. According to the scheme one has to take the main examination and if he is unable to clear the subjects then he has to appear in the subsequent examination by taking a compartment. Paragraph 2.7(v) again provides that 'in case the candidate has passed in practical at the main examination he/she shall appear only in the theory part and previous practical marks will be carried forward and accounted for'. The scheme nowhere provides that the compartmental examinations to be held either in July/August or March/April next year would be treated to be first examination. By no stretch of imagination it can be argued nor it can be legally held that the examination taken as compartmental or supplementary examination would be deemed to be main examination. For the purpose of declaring a candidate passed the scheme simply provides that he would be given two more attempts. The scheme is simply that a person who has passed himself in the required subjects may carry forward the subject in which he has failed and on a second attempt may secure the required grade to save the time which otherwise may go waste. The note appended to para 2.4.1 of the PPT entrance policy reads that a candidate who has appeared in the PPT has to acquire the required qualifying marks in the main examination. The language of the

^^,slk mEehnokj tks ih- Vh- esa lfEefyr gksdjmlh o'kZ esa vgdkjh ijh{kk] eq[; ijh{kk ea mkh.kZ u dj ckn dh fdlh ijh{kkesa mkh.kZ djrk gS] mls izos'k dh ik=rk ugha gksxh] Hkys gh mlus ml o'kZdh ih- ih- Vh- ijh{kk ds vk/kkj ij esfjV@ijh{kk lwph esa LFkku izkIr fd;k gksA ,slsmEehnokn dks ckn ds o'kZ@o'kksZ esa izos'k gsrq ik=rk jgsxh] o'krsZ ogml o'kZ ds fy;s vk;ksftr ih- ih- Vh- ijh{kk esa cSBs vkSj esfjV ds vk/kkjij LFkku izkIr djsA**

When the policy provides that for admission to the PPT course the candidate is required to pass the main examination then it cannot be gain said that any person who has passed in the subsequent examination, supplementary examination or compartments would be entitled to admission in the PPT course. Reading the Central Board Secondary Education Scheme of examination and pass criteria it would clearly appear that the compartment is treated to be a second or subsequent examination, if that is so, note appended to paragraph 2.41 of PPT entrance would apply with its full force.

7. On the facts there is no dispute that the petitioner could not pass all the subjects in the main examination. As the petitioner could not pass all the subjects offered by her in the main examination, she was not entitled to admission in the course. The respondents were not justified in refusing admission to the petitioner.

8. I find no reason to command the respondents to admit the petitioner. Petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. There shall however, be no orders as to cost.