If you are stuck in such a situation, here is what to do.
A student’s journey through a prestigious three-year degree program at Sarvottam Vishwavidyalaya, a central university in Rajdhanipur, has stretched into a five-year ordeal, highlighting a case of alleged systemic negligence and arbitrary rule-making within its Mathematics Department. This issue, which has reportedly affected numerous students over the years, revolves around the denial of opportunities to reappear for internal assessments.
The student, Aditya from Deccangarh, enrolled in the B.Sc. in Applied Mathematics program in 2022. He soon discovered a troubling practice within the department, allegedly enforced by the Head of Department (HOD), Professor Vikram Singh. The department consistently refused to allow students with backlogs or those who had a “year back” to retake their internal assessments, which constitute a significant 40% of the total grade for a subject.
The university’s academic ordinance, which governs examinations, was amended a few years ago. The amendment removed the mandatory requirement to pass the internal component to be eligible for the final external exam. However, it left a grey area: it did not explicitly state what happens when a student fails a subject and wishes to reappear for the internal assessment in a subsequent attempt. While other departments within the same Faculty of Sciences, such as Physics and Chemistry, adopted a student-friendly interpretation and allowed re-tests, the Mathematics Department took a rigid stance.
Aditya’s personal struggle began when he accumulated nine backlogs by his fourth semester, resulting in a year back. He realized that without the chance to score in the 40% internal component, his degree would be severely devalued. His requests to professors and the HOD were dismissed with responses like, “Show me where the rule says we have to conduct a re-test,” and demands for a written letter from the Controller of Examinations (CoE).
Frustrated by the bureaucratic hurdles and the unhelpful attitude of officials like Mr. Suresh Kumar at the CoE’s office and Dr. Manish Gupta, the Assistant Controller, Aditya decided to investigate. He filed complaints with the Dean of Students Welfare, Professor Anjali Sharma, who assured him of an inquiry, but no concrete action was taken. He then filed Right to Information (RTI) requests to get official clarification.
The RTI replies were shocking. They revealed that the department had no official rule preventing re-tests but was arbitrarily demanding “permission letters” from the CoE or the Dean’s office. More disturbingly, the documents showed that such permissions were granted to a select few students, sometimes even after the final results for the semester had been declared. This pointed towards a clear case of procedural discrimination, where the rules were applied inconsistently and unfairly.
Aditya has since collected testimonies from over 50 other students who have faced similar harassment, with some students having their degrees lapse entirely after spending five years at the university. This is not just one student’s story but a pattern of alleged academic misconduct that has jeopardized the futures of many who came to the university with aspirations of a better life.
Advice in such cases
Document Everything: Keep a meticulous record of all communications, including emails, applications submitted, and the names of officials you have spoken to. Make copies of all relevant documents, such as the university ordinance, mark sheets, and any official replies.
Use the RTI Act: The Right to Information Act is a powerful tool to obtain official records and information that authorities might not provide otherwise. Filing targeted RTIs can expose inconsistencies and procedural lapses, as seen in this case.
Formal Grievance Redressal: Exhaust all internal grievance redressal mechanisms. File formal written complaints with the Head of Department, the Dean of the Faculty, the Dean of Student Welfare, and the Controller of Examinations. A paper trail is crucial evidence.
Unite with Other Students: If other students are facing the same issue, form a collective. A group complaint carries more weight than an individual one. Collect testimonies and create a consolidated representation.
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation of come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Applicable Sections of Law
This situation does not fall under the ambit of criminal laws like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) or Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), as it is an administrative and educational matter. The primary legal recourse lies in constitutional and administrative law.
Article 14 of the Constitution of India: This guarantees the right to equality. The alleged arbitrary and discriminatory application of rules by one department, while other departments in the same faculty follow a different procedure, is a potential violation of this right.
Article 226 of the Constitution of India: A student can file a Writ Petition in the High Court under this article against the university (as it is considered a ‘State’ under Article 12). The petition can seek a writ of Mandamus to compel the university authorities to perform their duties fairly and according to the rules, or a writ of Certiorari to quash any arbitrary decision.
Principles of Natural Justice: These principles, including the right to be heard (audi alteram partem) and the rule against bias, are fundamental to fair administrative action. Denying students a chance to improve their scores without a fair process can be challenged as a violation of these principles.
Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation: If other departments are allowing re-tests, students of the Mathematics department could have a legitimate expectation that they would be treated similarly. A public body cannot arbitrarily go against such an expectation.
If you are the complainant
Organize Your Evidence: Systematically arrange all your documents: RTI replies, email chains, copies of complaints, university ordinances, and testimonies from other students.
Prepare a Chronology: Write down a clear timeline of events, from when the problem started to the latest communication. This helps in presenting the case clearly.
Seek a Final Representation: Before moving to court, send a final, comprehensive legal notice or representation through an advocate to the university’s Vice-Chancellor and Registrar, summarizing the entire issue and demanding a resolution within a specific timeframe.
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation of come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
If you are the victim
Assess the Damage: Calculate the academic and financial loss you have suffered due to the university’s actions. This includes loss of an academic year, a devalued degree, or the lapsing of your degree altogether.
Do Not Give Up: Even if the university has declared your degree lapsed, you may still have legal recourse. The court can intervene and direct the university to provide a final opportunity if it finds the process was unfair.
Explore Legal Action for Compensation: In addition to seeking academic relief, you may explore options for claiming compensation for the mental agony, harassment, and loss of career opportunities caused by the university’s negligence.
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation of come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
How the police behave in such cases
The police have no role in such matters. This is a civil dispute between students and a university, governed by administrative and constitutional law. The police will not register an FIR for issues related to examination rules, backlogs, or internal assessments. Approaching the police would be futile and they would rightly direct you to approach the university authorities or the courts. The only exception would be if the matter involves a distinct criminal offense like forging documents, criminal intimidation, or assault, which is not the primary issue here.
FAQs people normally have
What evidence is required?
To build a strong case against the university, you will need:
A copy of the university’s Academic Ordinance and any relevant amendments.
All RTI applications and the replies received from the university.
Copies of all written complaints and representations submitted to university officials.
Email correspondence with professors and administrative staff.
Your mark sheets and academic records that show the impact of the denied re-tests.
Written and signed testimonies from other students facing the same problem.
Any evidence (like the RTI reply in this case) that shows other students were given preferential or exceptional treatment.
How long will the investigation take?
The timeline can vary significantly. An internal university inquiry can take anywhere from a few weeks to several months, and often they are not conclusive. If you file a writ petition in the High Court, it may take a few hearings for the court to grant interim relief (like allowing you to sit for an exam provisionally). The final disposal of the case can take several months to over a year, depending on the complexity of the case and the court’s workload. However, courts are often sensitive to matters involving students’ careers and may act expeditiously.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India