A student of Calcutta University had failed in the M.Sc (physics) Part I exams twice, in 2001 and 2002.

But the high court last Friday ordered the university to promote the student and issue him a fresh marksheet.

The judgement followed the university authorities? failure to produce documents relating to the rules on the basis of which Subhendu Biswas had been denied promotion to Part II.

Subhendu?s lawyer Mrinal Kanti Mukherjee said the student had first appeared for the Part I examinations in 2001.

He scored 87 in papers I, II and III together. On getting the marksheet, he found that five marks had been deducted, without assigning any reason, bringing his aggregate down to 82.

According to the examination rules, a student has to score a minimum of 88 in papers I, II and III to clear the post-graduate exams.

Subhendu approached the authorities to ascertain why five marks had been deducted from his aggregate.

That was to be done, he was told, if a student failed to score at least 20 in one of the three papers.

Subhendu sat for the examinations again in 2002. This time he scored 90 in the three papers. But once again, five marks had been deducted from his total, lowering it to 85, three less than the qualifying threshold.

After having approached the authorities, he was told that he had scored less than 20 in one of the papers.

Subhendu this time was not convinced and moved the high court against the decision.

The court asked the university to produce documents to prove that such a rule existed. The university, however, failed to produce the documents, prompting the court to order Subhendu?s promotion. The authorities were also asked to issue him a fresh marksheet.

Controller of examinations Onkar Sadhan Adhikari said certain rules, particularly those relating to examinations, were often amended.

The amendments are mostly based on the recommendations of the university?s policy-making bodies, such as the senate and the syndicate. ?But, unfortunately, the changes are not always conveyed to the departments concerned,? Adhikari reasoned.

The rule on deduction of marks existed till 2001. It was amended the next year, but the examination section was not informed. Adhikari said the court?s order relating to Subhendu would be carried out.