Civil Appeal No 6009 of 1983
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 19th April 1983 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No 1484 of 1983
WITH Civil Appeal Nos 1207 and 1208 of 1980
Appeals by special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 30th May 1980 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition Nos
1759 and 1848 of 1980
JL Gupta DN Gupta and VK Verma for the Appellant in CA
No 6009 of 1983
JL Gupta and CMNayar for the Appellant in CA
No 1207 and 1208 and 1980
Hardev Singh and RS Sodhi for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MISRA J
Each of these appeals is by special leave and is directed against the decision of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in separate writ petitions
A common question is involved in all the three matters and that relates to a correct interpretation of Rule 271a in Chapter III of the Punjab University Regulations
Respondents in each of these appeals was a student of the Punjab University for the Master Degree in Law LLM
Rule 33 7 of the Punjab University Regulations provides 7
The minimum marks required to pass Part III examination as the case may be shall be i 45 per cent in each paper and ii 50 per cent in the aggregate
 It may be stated that there are eight papers in all each carrying 100 marks and Part I covers four papers while Part II covers the remainder
Rule 27 reads as follows 271a
A candidate who appears in all subjects of an examination and who fails in one or more subject written practical sessional or viva voce andor the aggregate if there is a separate requirement of passing on the aggregate shall be given grace marks up to maximum of 1 per cent of the total aggregate marks excluding marks for internal assessment to make up the deficiency if by such addition the candidate can pass the examination
While awarding grace marks fraction working to 12 or more will be rounded to a whole Provided that grace marks be also awarded to a candidate if by awarding such marks he can earn exemption or compartment in subjects and parts
b A candidate who re appears to clear the compartment or subjects and parts in which he has been declared eligible to re appear shall be awarded grace marks up to 1 of the total marks of the subjects and parts in which he re appears if by such addition the candidate can pass in that subjects or parts
 Each of the respondents failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 7 and being eligible to clear the subject in which he failed on compartmental basis reappeared in such subject in the next examination
As on the performance of the subsequent examination each of the respondents was not eligible to pass by complying with the requirements of Rule 7 the need for invoking Rule 27 arose
The University authorities took the view that Rule 271b authorised addition of the grace marks of up to 1 per cent on the marks secured in the subjects in which the candidate reappeared and as with that benefit given the candidates did not pass they were found not to have been successful
That led to each of the 34 respondents filing a separate writ application before the High Court
The High Court referred to the rule and observed The only question to be seen is whether Regulation 271a in Chapter III of the Punjab University Calendar Volume II 1976 relating to Moderation of Question Papers and results of examinations is applicable or not
We have gone through clauses a and b of this Regulation very carefully and we find that clause b is not applicable
We are unable to agree with the contention of Shri Gupta the learned counsel for the University that the case would fall under clause b
This contention is without any merit as it is clear that this clause will only come into play if the candidate is failing in the subject in which he or she reappears
It is quite clear from the facts that the petitioner has not so far availed advantage as given in clause b so that she could get one per cent mark of the total marks in all the subjects The contention of the learned counsel for the University that clause a will only apply if a candidate appears in all the subjects in the examination is without any merit
The language of this provision does not show what has been contended before us
For the reasons recorded above we allow this writ application and direct the University to make available the benefit of clause a of the said Regulation to the petitioner and declare the result of the petitioner accordingly
 A bare reading of the Rule 27 referred to as the Regulations by the High Court makes it clear that clause a is applicable where the full examination is taken and clause b is attracted where the candidate reappears to clear the compartment or subject and part in which he has been declared eligible to reappear
In each of these cases the candidate was reappearing to clear the paper in which he or she had failed clause b was clearly attracted and the benefit under clause a was not available
The University had taken that decision and took the same stand before the High Court in answer to the rule nisi
We are clearly of the opinion that the 35 High Court went wrong in taking the view that when a candidate reappeared to clear a paper or a subject on being found eligible to do so clause a was attracted
The language of clause b is such as would squarely apply to such a situation
Having taken the view that clause a governed the matter the High Court had no occasion to express any opinion as to if clause b applied what benefit the candidate would have got
The provision in clause b is clear and on reappearing the candidate becomes entitled to grace marks of up to one per cent of the total marks of the subjectsubjects in which he reappears
Once clause b applies no reference is available to the performance in the regular examination taken earlier and the benefit of grace marks to the extent indicated has to be confined to the performance at the reappearance
Once this is the position each of the candidates was not eligible to pass
We however find that a direction was given in this Court on 19680 on the concession of the University that the respondents in the two appeals of 1980 would be declared to have passed irrespective of the result of the appeals
Learned counsel appearing for the University before us reiterated his consent and even agreed that the respondent in the remaining appeal may be given the same advantage as the University did not intend to make any discrimination
In view of this special feature we do not disturb the declaration of the University that each of the respondents has passed the examination taken by him or her
We must indicate our disapproval of the position obtaining in the Punjab University that in respect of post graduate degrees grace marks are being awarded
A master s degree in any speciality is considered to be the highest qualification in the normal run
It is very much necessary that such a degree should be conferred only on the deserving students who having studied the subject and taken the appropriate examination conducted by the University at the end of such studies have deserved the degree on the basis of their performance
There should be no scope for looking for grace marks at such level and the sooner the Punjab University abandons the practice of awarding grace marks in respect of post graduate examinations the better it would be in the interest of higher education in this country
36 We allow each of these appeals and set aside the judgments of the High Court in each of the writ petitions without any order for costs
To avoid confusion we reiterate that our vacating the judgments of the High Court do not in any manner affect the declarations made in favour of the respondents by the appellant University in regard to passing of the Master Degree Examinations in law
SR Appeal allowed


Summary:
Respondents in each of these appeals could not clear the LLM examination in accordance with Regulation 7 of the Punjab University Regulations either in the first attempt or later while taking on compartmental basis even after addition of grace marks as laid down in Rule 271b of the University Regulations
The respondents filed separate writ petitions praying for a direction to give the benefit of moderation grace mark as calculated under Rule 271a
The High Court rejected the plea of the Appellant University holding that it was Rule 271b that applied and not Rule 27 1a
Hence the appeal by Special Leave
Allowing the appeal the Court  HELD  A bare reading of the Rule 27 referred to as the Regulations by the High Court makes it clear that clause a is applicable where the full examination is taken and clause b is attracted where the candidate reappears to clear the compartment or subject and part in which he has been declared eligible to reappear
In each of these cases the candidate was reappearing to clear the paper in which he or she had failed clause b was clearly attracted and the benefit under clause a was not available
The language of clause b is such as would squarely apply to such a situation
The provision in clause b is clear and on reappearing the candidate becomes entitled to grace marks of up to one per cent of the total marks of the subjectsubjects in which he reappears
Once clause b applies no reference is available to the performance in the regular examination taken earlier and the benefit of grace marks to the extent indicated has to be confined to the performance at the reappearance
Once this is the position each of the candidates was not eligible to pass
34GH 35B C In view of the declaration dated 1961980 made before the court that irrespective of the result of the appeals the candidates will be declared to have passed the Court as a special case did not want to disturb the result 35D 32 Observation The position obtaining in the Punjab University in respect of Post Graduate degrees namely grace marks being awarded is disapproved
A Master s degree in any speciality is considered to be the highest qualification in the normal run
It is very much necessary that such a degree should be conferred only on the deserving students who having studied the subject and taken the appropriate examination conducted by the University at the end of such studies have deserved the degree on the basis of their performance
There should be no scope for looking for grace marks at such level and the sooner the Punjab University abandons the practice of awarding grace marks in respect of post graduate examinations the better it would be in the interest of higher education in this country
35F H