The Bombay high court has said that it is not the “right” of students to appear for the exam if they do not have the requisite attendance. The high court recently dismissed the petition of a Bachelor of Management Studies student of Mithibai college in Vile Parle, who had approached the court after the college barred her from sitting for the exam. Though she was later allowed to appear for the exam in March, based on an interim order by the high court, the college refused to release her results. She then approached the high court again.
Justice S.C. Dharamadhikari and Justice Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, while refusing to interfere in the college’s decision, said, “In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in the petition. It is dismissed. We attach no significance nor confer any right on the student for appearance in the examination of March 2016. If the petitioner needs to repeat the semester, she will have to do it.’’
Kumari Kamakshi Roy, a student of Mithibai, had moved the court as the college did not allow her to sit in the final examination because she did not attend 75 per cent lectures, which is mandatory as per university rules.
In her petition, she contended her grandmother was unwell and her parents were constantly out of Mumbai for work because of which she had to take care of her grandmother. However, the college was not satisfied with this reason.
The court heard her contentions and allowed her to attend the examination. While giving relief to the petitioner, the court clarified that ad-interim order is subject to further direction and final orders.
After the examination, the college refused to give her final result. When she asked about it, the college once again informed her that her result was withheld because of her poor attendance.
The girl again approached the HC. Her main argument was that if the court had allowed her to sit in the examination, then the college must release her result.
The college in its affidavit informed the court that she had only 35 per cent attendance in the second semester. Accepting the college’s arguments, the court said, “If the student is allowed to sit for the exam, then that was because the college was lenient and not because it is a rule.”
