Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(ii) A candidate appearing in compartment/reappear shall also be eligible for the grace marks but the limit of grace marks shall be one percent (1%) of the total aggregate marks of the subject/s in which he appears.

(iii) A candidate shall be given upto 5 marks i.e. 1% of the aggregate marks as grace marks to improve the division or securing 50% marks in aggregate. However, a candidate who has already availed himself or the grace marks for passing the examination shall not be entitled to these marks for improving the division in the examination."

Keeping in view the obvious and urgent importance of the matter, the Minister concerned may please be asked to make a statement on the floor of the House."

Chandigarh: Sd/- Nachhattar Singh Mavi The 13th December 2004. Secretary."

7. On 23.12.2005 (21.12.2005?), a meeting was held under the Chairmanship of Shri Harnam Dass Johar, the then Education Minister, Punjab, which was attended by various authorities of the Education Department, Punjab, besides Prof. H.S. Sidhu, Chairman, Punjab School Education Board-respondent No. 3. Issues concerning streamlining the system of conduct of examinations in the State were discussed in the said meeting and some decisions were taken. On the issue of award of grace marks by the respondent Board, it was decided that no grace marks would be allowed other than the grace marks provided in the regulations of the Board (P-1).

32. It has also come on record that S. Avtar Singh, who was appointed as Controller of Examinations on deputation was re- called by order passed by the Government of Punjab on 25.4.2007 (P-8) and directing the Board to give temporary charge of the post to the petitioner. She submitted her joining report as Controller of Examinations on 27.4.2007 (P-9).

33. The issue concerning grace marks has been subject matter of controversy within the Board. Regulation 16(b) of the of the Punjab School Education Board Calendar, Volume-II, which has already been noticed in preceding para 5 above, concerns the award of grace marks in the Senior Secondary Examination. There was a 'Call Attention Notice' in the State Assembly where the attention of the Government was drawn towards the decision taken by the Board to grant 17 grace marks to the failed science students in +2 Class Examination in order to raise pass percentage of the result of the Education Board. According to the 'Call Attention Notice', it reflected declining level of education standard in the State of Punjab, which caused widespread resentment in the general public. The notice further point out that the students so promoted with 17 grace marks would not be able to compete successfully on merit in the competitive examination and their future is likely to be blocked. The education system in the schools is heading towards ultimate collapse and the agency entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring fairness to conducting and supervising the examination in the State was facilitating the failed students to march over the edge of merit of the laborious candidates. Accordingly, the Minister concerned was asked to make a statement on the floor of the House. The then Education Minister alleged to have received report that for quite some time past at the instance of certain vested interests within and outside the Board including cheating mafia under the garb of academies assuming fancy names and styles (Class 9-fail-save-one-year-and-do-10th directly-type) had been artificially jacking up pass percentages by award of extra grace marks in addition to what was provided for in the relevant regulation of the Board.

36. Even later on, on 29.9.2006 the Education Secretary, School Education, sent a letter seeking complete details of grace marks awarded by the Board in all subjects and the total number of students appearing in the Board Examinations during last 10 years. The information was also solicited about the names and the designation of authorities at whose level such decision is taken. The letter also reveals that how the Government has seriously taken the issue of award of grace marks. The petitioner has alleged in para 32(ii) that she explained to Prof Sidhu-respondent No. 3 in person twice on 25th and 26th of May, 2006 that the Education Minister has telephonically reiterated that grace marks except specifically provided for in Regulation 16(b) alone are to be awarded and he had asked the Principal Secretary, School Education Board to thoroughly review the powers assumed by the Board Chairman subsequently by adding new provisions and put up the case for final decision of the Government. The petitioner is stated to have apprised Prof. Sidhu-respondent No. 3 that the directive issued by the Government has to be complied with as the Government has statutory power to exercise superintendence, direction and control over the Board and its officers. On 28.5.2006, the Education Minister again spoke to the petitioner on phone and directed that "tell the Chairman that till Government reviewed his powers to grant additional grace marks, takes a view of the matter, he should strictly comply with the decision taken by the Government earlier not to grant such marks". While sending the file second time to the Chairman, the petitioner personally conveyed to him the direction issued by the Education Minister. However, respondent No. 3 remained adamant on awarding additional three grace marks, which is contrary to the Regulations and in violation of the decision taken by the Government in the meeting dated 21.12.2005 and the act of the Chairman is also under scrutiny of the Government. Therefore, the substance of the charges levelled against the petitioner in the charge sheet itself would not be made out.