Punjab and Haryana High Court – Fresh Evaluation of MD Examination Directed for Non-Compliance with MCI Regulations

Case Name: Dr. Mohini Garg and others v. State of Punjab and others

Citation: CWP No. 22669 of 2019 (Neutral Citation: 2020:PHHC:000414)

Date of Judgment: 6 January 2020

Bench: Justice Sudhir Mittal

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the writ petition of a postgraduate medical student, directing fresh evaluation of her answer books in accordance with Regulation 14(1)(b) of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. The Court held that evaluation by only two examiners was contrary to the mandatory requirement of four examiners, including two external examiners, and hence fresh evaluation was necessary.

Summary: The petitioners, students of the MD Pathology course at Government Medical College, Patiala, challenged their examination results of May-June 2019. Petitioners No. 2 to 10 qualified in supplementary examinations held in December 2019, rendering their petitions infructuous. The case continued only for petitioner No. 1, who failed again.

She contended that her answer books were evaluated by only two examiners (one external and one internal), in violation of Regulation 14(1)(b) of the 2000 Regulations, which mandates evaluation by four examiners, with at least two being external. The respondent-University asserted that evaluation by two examiners was sufficient and valid.

The Court examined the pleadings and found that while the University ambiguously claimed that four examiners evaluated the answer books, it effectively admitted that only two examiners had done so. It held that compliance with the statutory regulations was mandatory and the evaluation process was legally flawed.

Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition, directing that the petitioner’s answer books be re-evaluated by four different examiners, including two external examiners, within four weeks, and her result be declared thereafter.