"Reference To Pandemic, Consequent Lockdown Inadequate To Explain Failure To Re Register In Exams": Delhi HC Rejects Student's Plea

Nupur Thapliyal

4 Aug 2021 7:37 AM GMT

  • Reference To Pandemic, Consequent Lockdown Inadequate To Explain Failure To Re Register In Exams: Delhi HC Rejects Students Plea

    Observing that the reference to covid 19 pandemic and consequent lockdown is an inadequate reason to explain failure to re register in third year University Exams, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a student's plea aggrieved for not being permitted to take the Third Year examination scheduled in August, 2021.The petitioner, a BA programme student enrolled in Indira Gandhi National...

    Observing that the reference to covid 19 pandemic and consequent lockdown is an inadequate reason to explain failure to re register in third year University Exams, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a student's plea aggrieved for not being permitted to take the Third Year examination scheduled in August, 2021.

    The petitioner, a BA programme student enrolled in Indira Gandhi National Open University had completed his first and second year examinations. His grievance was that the University had informed him that he will be permitted to take the examinations only in December, 2021 and not in the month of August.

    A single judge bench comprising of Justice Prateek Jalan observed thus:

    "The reasons put forth for the petitioner's failure to re-register for the third year courses at the required time are untenable. The petitioner would have been aware of the requirement of re-registration, as he had already undertaken the process for his second year. The registration process in the present case was entirely online, and reference to the Covid-19 pandemic and consequent lockdown is therefore inadequate to explain the petitioner's failure."

    Furthermore, it said:

    "It is difficult to appreciate that a diligent student, who wished to determine the procedure for re-registration upon which his continuing education was based, made phone calls which remained unanswered for a long period, but did not address a single written communication to the University."

    Enrolled in the year 2018, the petitioner was unable to take the first year examination schedule in June, 2019 and proposed to take the examinations alongwith his second year examinations in June, 2020. He had then undertaken first year examinations in February-March, 2021, as the examinations were postponed due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

    The second year examinations were not held in June, 2020 and all students were promoted to the third year pursuant to a notification of the University dated December 12, 2020. Another notification was issued by the University dated 9 July, 2021 asking students to register for the aforesaid examinations between May 17 to July 12, 2021.

    It was thus the case of petitioner that despite trying several times, he was unable to fill the online examination form, but his third year courses were not shown on the online portal, and he was therefore unable to register. 

    After being informed that the registeration was closed for August, 2021 examination, the University informed him that he would be allowed to appear in December examination.

    Therefore, it was submitted that he was unable to step out of his home due to the Covid-19 lockdown, and that his calls to the University were unanswered.

    "In any event, even if the petitioner was unaware of the procedure for re-registration, as he claims, or otherwise unable to complete the process, he has not placed on record any communication addressed to the University at that time raising such issues. The representations filed by the petitioner are all of July, 2021, after the last date for filing the examination forms for the August, 2021 examinations had already passed." The Court said.

    "If the petitioner was indeed earnest in his desire to take the examinations in this session, he would have taken steps to register for the same. Upon not being permitted to register, as he claims, it is expected that the petitioner would have raised the issue with the University in good time."

    In view of this, the plea was dismissed by the Court.

    Title: KARAN CHAUDHRY v. INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

    Click Here To Read Order

    Next Story