THE ALLAHABAD High Court has taken a serious view of an incident of erroneous feeding of less marks of a candidate in the computer than what he had actually scored in the Allahabad University Post Graduate Admission Test.
Making strong observations, the court has directed the AU authorities to conduct internal enquiry into the matter and file report within one month.
Passing this order, the Court said, “When the career of a candidate is at stake, the university is required to exercise utmost circumspection and explore its own ways and means at least to minimise the recurrence of such incidents”.
Warning the AU authorities against playing with the future of students, the court further said, “The need of the hour was for authorities concerned to evolve foolproof mechanism free of any extrinsic pressure or error of this nature and in case of any error, the person responsible for the mistake/ omission should not go unscathed and accountability must be fixed besides provision of repairing the loss and damage to the candidate.”
Petitioner SK Yadav candidate in PGAT conducted by AU, had approached the Allahabad High Court on the plea that though he had fairly well in the test, the result declared has left his dejected as he has been denied admission. At one stage, as per the direction of the court, AU counsel produced the answer scripts of the petitioner.
{{/usCountry}}Petitioner SK Yadav candidate in PGAT conducted by AU, had approached the Allahabad High Court on the plea that though he had fairly well in the test, the result declared has left his dejected as he has been denied admission. At one stage, as per the direction of the court, AU counsel produced the answer scripts of the petitioner.
{{/usCountry}}The answer scripts disclosed that the petitioner had secured 184 marks and by a freak chance, only 134 marks were erroneously fed into the computer.
Candidates securing up to 150 marks were admitted to the post-graduate courses.
Expressing anguish over this revelation, Justice SN Srivastava, said, “What has been revealed is indeed disquieting and leaves the court brooding over that all is not well in our academic Institutions.”
The court further observed, “The revelation of feeding erroneously less marks than what the candidates actually scored in the test should serve as a wake-up call to all concerned.
Although the counsel appearing for the university has denied any foul play in the matter and has attributed it to mere inadvertent omission, there is lurking suspicion that all is not well in our academic institutions.
The recklessness of this magnitude leaves the conscience in consternation and the Court must have proactive attitude in galvanising the university authorities into taking urgent steps in order not to leave any room for recurrence of such incidence.