1. The Appellant seeks to challenge the Order dated 31.08.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) 13782/2022, dismissing the Writ Petition which was filed by the Appellant herein for a direction to the Respondent herein to declare afresh his result in paper-II of Orthopaedics specialty in Diplomate of National Board (DnB) Final Theory (Board Specialty) Examination held in December 2020.
2. Shorn of details, the facts of the case are as under:
a) The Appellant herein took admission in DnB in Orthopedics at Bokaro General Hospital, Jharkhand in 2018. It is stated that the Appellant appeared in DnB Final Theory (Board Specialty) Examination in December 2020. In terms of the DnB theory examination, as set out in Information Bulletin for DnB/DrNB Final Examination June 2022, a candidate has to appear in four papers each having maximum 100 marks and the candidates must score at least 200 marks out of 400 marks in aggregate to qualify for DnB practical examination. In terms of the Information Bulletin, there is a provision of grace marks for up to 2% of maximum marks, i.e. 8/400, to be given to those candidates who score between 192-199 marks in aggregate. It is the case of the Appellant herein that one question, being Question No. 3(b), carrying five marks, in Paper-II of Orthopedics specialty in DnB Final Theory Paper was incorrect and, therefore, five marks should be awarded to every candidate. It is stated that if five marks are awarded to the Appellant herein then his total, which at present is 189 out of 400 marks, would become 192 marks which will bring him within the zone of consideration for 08 grace marks that would make him eligible for DnB practical examination, for which the cut-off is 200 marks.
b) The Appellant herein approached this Court by filing the Writ Petition, being W.P. (C) 13782/2022, stating that the paper-II must be revaluated and 05 marks must be awarded to every candidate. The University filed a reply in the Writ Petition stating that Question No. 3(b) of paper 2 of the DnB Orthopedics Final Theory Examination December 2020 Session, which was found to be incorrect, carried a weightage of 05 marks and the University took a decision not to award any mark to any candidate and, therefore, after removing the technically incorrect question, the maximum marks that can be awarded to a candidate comes to 95. It is further stated that in order to maintain uniformity of maximum marks across all specialties, i.e. 400 for all Board Specialties, it was necessary that the marks obtained out of 95 maximum marks in Paper 2 be extrapolated to the original 100 marks as the technically incorrect Question No. 3(b) was not evaluated. Accordingly, the marks obtained by all the candidates out of 95 marks in Paper 2 were extrapolated to 100 marks based on the performance of the candidates in the valid question paper of 95 marks. It was, therefore, the stand of the University that the said extrapolation of marks obtained by the candidates out of 95 marks, cannot, in any manner be termed as marks awarded for the technically incorrect question which was never evaluated. Examples were given in the reply that if a student obtains 20 marks in paper-II which was of 95 marks, then his extrapolated marks out of 100 would come to 21 marks. Similarly, a candidate who obtained 30 marks out of 95 marks, then his extrapolated marks would come to 31.05 out of 100. The Appellant herein, who scored 39 marks out of 95, would get 41 marks out of 100 after applying the method of extrapolation.
c) This method of extrapolation was challenged by the Appellant herein by filing the abovementioned Writ Petition. The learned Single Judge, vide Order impugned herein, dismissed the Writ Petition by holding that the decision of the University for extrapolating the marks could no........