Chhattisgarh High Court: Dealing as to whether a student can be compelled to accept the result of revaluation for which he had never applied, a bench of Prashant K. Mishra J quashed the result of revaluation and the subsequent revalued mark sheet with reduced marks on the observance that the reduced marks after the subject revaluation would adversely affect the career prospects of the petitioner.
In the instant case, the petitioner having secured more than 55% marks in his LLM examination was eligible to be registered for PhD, however he was shocked to receive information that his marks were revalued for which he never applied for the same, and now he is scoring less than 55% marks and is not eligible for PhD. Counsel for the petitioner Paranjpe, contended that the application of revaluation of answer scripts has been moved by someone else with forged signature to ruin the career of the petitioner, and hence deserves to be quashed. Counsel for the respondent Choubey, contended that University cannot be held liable in this case, as it acted bonafidely on an application filed for revaluation.
The expert examined the signature on the revaluation application and submitted a report that the petitioner has neither signed the revaluation form not has filled the same. The Court relied on the report of the expert and noted that it is a fraud on the petitioner and the person cannot be compelled to swallow the adverse result of exercise for which he never applied nor consented. Accordingly, the Court quashed the result of revaluation and held that the candidate not applying for revaluation cannot be compelled to accept reduced marks based on application moved fraudulently by some one else. Harjeet Singh Chawla v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2015 SCC OnLine Chh 31, decided on