Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a final-year engineering student, challenged a direction issued by the Vice Chancellor of Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University that altered the revaluation procedure for examination marks. The student had appeared in the 8th semester examination and received only 6 marks in Digital Signal Processing. After obtaining a photocopy and seeking revaluation, a moderator initially awarded 49 marks, but because the variation exceeded 19 marks, a second valuer awarded 26 marks. As per the impugned Direction No. 24/2015, the mean of the closer two examiners (6 and 26) was computed, resulting in 16 marks being awarded. However, the existing Ordinance No. 16 of 2007, clause 20, prescribed that when marks varied by more than 16%, the answer book was to be reassessed by a third examiner and the average of the higher two examiners was to be given, which would have yielded 37.5 marks. The student argued that the direction was ultra vires the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, as the Vice Chancellor lacked the power to amend an existing ordinance. The University defended the direction by invoking emergency powers under Section 14(7) and 14(8) of the Act, asserting that the amendment was necessary and had been approved by the Board of Examination and Academic Council. The High Court examined the statutory scheme and found that Section 54 vests the power to make or amend ordinances exclusively in the Management Council, and Section 28(ee) expressly prohibits delegation of that power to the Vice Chancellor. The court distinguished the earlier decision in Ramdeobaba Sarvajanik Samiti v. Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, where no ordinance existed, noting that in the present case Ordinance No. 16 of 2007 squarely governed the situation. The direction was held to be an amendment, not a filling of a lacuna, and therefore beyond the Vice Chancellor’s authority. The court struck down Direction No. 24 of 2015 and directed the University to proceed under clause 20 of the ordinance, awarding the petitioner 37.5 marks within one week. No costs were imposed.
Headnote
A) University Law - Vice Chancellor's Powers - Section 14(8), Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - When an ordinance regulates the matter, Vice Chancellor cannot exercise power under Section 14(8) to amend ordinance; Section 14(8) applies only when no ordinance exists - Held that Direction No. 24/2015 was ultra vires as it amended clause 20 of Ordinance No. 16 of 2007 while ordinance was in force (Paras 14, 18-20). B) University Law - Delegation of Powers - Section 28(ee) read with Section 54(1) & (2), Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Management Council has exclusive power to make, amend or repeal ordinances and cannot delegate this to Vice Chancellor - Held that Vice Chancellor lacked authority to issue direction that effectively amended the ordinance (Paras 13, 14, 19). C) University Law - Emergency Powers - Section 14(7), Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Emergency power under Section 14(7) cannot be used to amend an existing ordinance; subject to satisfaction of exigency - Held that Vice Chancellor's action was not a filling of lacuna but an amendment, and no emergency justified overriding the ordinance (Paras 15, 19-20). D) University Law - Revaluation of Marks - Clause 20, Ordinance No. 16 of 2007 - Procedure for revaluation when marks vary by more than 16% requires taking average of higher two examiners - Court directed application of clause 20 to award 37.5 marks to petitioner (Paras 5, 6, 17, 21).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Vice Chancellor of the University had the power to issue Direction No. 24/2015 amending the existing Ordinance No. 16 of 2007 under Section 14(8) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, when the matter was already governed by an ordinance.
Final Decision
Direction No. 24 of 2015 struck down; respondents directed to proceed under clause 20 of Ordinance No. 16 of 2007 and award necessary marks to petitioner within one week. Rule made absolute without costs.
Law Points
- Vice Chancellor cannot amend an existing ordinance under Section 14(8) when the matter is governed by an ordinance
- Section 28(ee) prohibits delegation of power to make or amend ordinances to Vice Chancellor
- Emergency power under Section 14(7) applies to emergent situations but does not allow amendment of existing ordinance
- Direction altering examination procedure is an amendment
- not filling a lacuna
- Management Council has exclusive power to make or amend ordinances under Section 54
- Academic Council's role is mandatory for ordinances concerning standards
