The Bombay High Court has directed Mumbai University in an interim order, to provide students with extra sheets in exams if they require it to complete their answers.
The order comes after Mumbai University barred the students from asking for extra sheets in order to avoid problems with its online assessment system.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and BP Colabawalla said that the students cannot be penalised for the “erroneous” decision by the University .
The justices referred to the numerous petitions filed earlier in court by students who alleged that their supplementary answer sheets had been lost by the university which caused them to lose marks. The bench noted the university had subsequently given students after court intervention marks based on the principles of averages, following which the university decided to ban the use of supplements.
Student Challenges Circular Issued By University
The Bombay High Court bench was hearing a petition filed by Manasi Bhushan, a final year student of Law.
In her plea, the student challenged the circular issued by the university in October that stated that students will not be able to avail of additional answer sheets or supplements during exams.
Appearing on her behalf , advocate Vishal Kanade argued in court that the university must tackle the problems in its online assessment process rather than denying supplements to students.
He had also noted that students, particularly those studying law, often had to write longer and subjective answers which required them to need supplements.
Technical Issue Hampering Use Of Supplements
According to the university, the main answer booklets contain bar codes that are different from the barcode carried by the supplements which causes confusion during online assessment.
In many cases the main booklet and the supplements of one candidate were marked as being of separate students, while in other cases the supplementary sheets were lost. These issues led to the university issuing orders that students limit their answers to the main answer booklet which contained 37 pages .
University Cannot Prejudice Students’ Rights
The justices however rejected the argument provided by the university that the main answer booklet was sufficient for students for completing the answers. They pointed out that it was “common knowledge” that every student’s handwriting was different due to which some students might not finish the entire main answer booklet while others may need extra sheets.
The bench observed that the idea was to provide students with sufficient sheets for completing their answers, and it was up to the university to provide loose sheets or another booklet.
It emphasised that the “the university’s last minute decisions” cannot be allowed “to prejudice the rights of the students.”.
The HC bench also dismissed the university’s claim that there was no scope for the court to intervene in the issue noting that the university’s circular could not be treated “as a piece of delegated legislation.”
