Date-sheet of backlog 2013-batch LLM students stayed
SRINAGAR: The J&K High Court has issued a notice to Kashmir University calling it to file objections to a plea by a student of LLM course alleging foul play in her result score.
While seeking objections in first week of May, a single bench of the court comprising Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey stayed the date sheet dated April 17 issued by university in so far as it relates to conduct of the Examination of the LL.M 3rd Semester of backlog students of Batch-2013 till the matter is finally decided.
In her plea, the petitioner— Tanzeela Sharif—has stated that her 3rd semester examination was conducted in March last year and the varsity declared the result after nine months on 9 January this year. All the candidates are stated to have been declared failed and behind the result, she alleged, is a “backdrop story.”
She stated that she along-with other six students applied for re-evaluation on 12 January and its result was declared after three months on 7 April with no change in the earlier result. The petitioner stated that she and other students applied for Xerox copies of the answer scripts on April 13 which were supplied to them after two days.
On perusal of the answer scripts, the students sensed what they called serious foul play behind their result as the cover page of the Xerox copy of the answer script did not contain the column or format of the 1st Re-evaluation that was printed on the front of the cover page of the University answer scripts.
“Instead, while making the Xerox copies, the cover pages of the answer scripts seemingly had been folded in a manner that this format/column of 1st Re-evaluation does not come in the Xerox copy. Not only that, lest the impression of the entries recorded in the 1st Re-evaluation column/format on the front side of the page becomes visible and is readable from the back of the page, the back of the page was photocopied after shielding the impression by putting a paper on it,” the petitioner said.
She stated that as per her as well as information of other students, they were awarded more than 20 marks in the 1st Re-evaluation by the examiner. Instead of proceeding ahead in accordance with the statutes, the petitioner alleged that the authorities “tampered re-evaluation and scribbled marks on the margin over-leaf in each of these answer scripts, showing them to be awarded in 1st Re-evaluation.”
The petitioner stated to have taken up the matter with the Controller of Examinations and the Vice Chancellor of the varsity but to no avail.
“A naked eye examination and perusal of the relevant pages of the photocopies of the answer scripts appended with the petition corroborate what is stated by the petitioner, and leads the Court to a prima facie satisfaction that the conduct of the concerned officials of the respondents has not been above suspicion and that (they) have failed to adhere to the relevant Statutes,” the court observed, adding that the students cannot be made to appear in the Examination unless the cloud over the genuineness of the results of Re-evaluation is dissipated.
“Otherwise, I am convinced, they are likely to be put to great jeopardy. This, in that context, is a very serious matter, for, the statutes are meant to be strictly followed, not to be violated to the hilt at the whim of any authority,” the court said, emphasizing that since the matter concerns the pursuit of specialised studies and award to the students, it cannot brook any further delay.
Subsequently, the court issued notice and directed the university officials to file the objections without delay.