Delhi High Court: Online Open Book Examination Doesn’t Harm Student’s Rights

Must Read

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work,...

Follow us

The High Court of Delhi on Friday allowed Delhi University (DU) to proceed with its online Open Book Examinations (OBE) for final year students. The Court declined the student’s plea to stay the exam. However, it passed a slew of directions to address the various concerns raised by students. The OBE is set to begin on Monday.

Facts of the Case

In Anupam & Ors vs The University of Delhi, the petition challenged the decision of the University to conduct online OBE. Many DU students filed the petition because it is discriminatory as most students do not have access to the internet or books. Hence, instead of OBE, the Petitioners mooted for the project-based, internal, or assessment based on past results. But DU, on the other hand, remained consistent to conduct exams before 30th September.

Petitioner’s Arguments

Advocate Akash Sinha appeared for the Petitioners. He contended that the online OBE, in its present form, was discriminatory qua students as many students have no cyber facilities/resources or are stuck in COVID-19 quarantine zones or flooded areas.

Mr Sinha further added that “time-bound” examination (as per UGC guidelines) and OBE violates the rights guaranteed under Article 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution.

Reference was also made to other universities such as NLU Delhi and JNU as it gave more than 24 hours to its students to write the examination.

Respondent’s Argument

Senior Advocate Sachin Dutta and Advocate M Rupal defended DU’s decision. They argued that OBE is the best way to carry forward as per UGC guidelines. Also, a student wouldn’t need to have very high technology at his/her disposal to sit for the examination.

It was further submitted that the senior academicians and experts decided to conduct OBE. Hence as a rule of prudence, the Court should not interfere in the academic sphere.

Moreover, Professor Vinay Gupta, the Dean of Examinations, had apprised the Court that all the students had submitted their emails and that the helplines were available on the website for the students to access. Furthermore, a Grievance Committee would also look into the matter via a notification dated 4th August.

Court’s Observation

The Court observed that the process had inbuilt safeguards, including the availability of Common Service Centres for students with no cyberinfrastructure, grievance committee, and helplines. Also, the students would always have the option to sit for a physical examination that would happen in September 2020.

Court’s Order

The Single Bench of Justice Pratibha M Singh passed the following directions:

  1. The question paper will get uploaded on the portal and sent to the student’s email ID.
  2. Students will get an extra hour for uploading the answer sheet.
  3. Auto-generated email to be sent confirming receipt of the answer sheet.
  4. Details of Nodal officer, Central Email ID must get published online.
  5. Common Service Centre to notify all its centres by the end of the day.
  6. There must be a grievance officer to address the issues raised by the students. In case of a non-redressal, the complaint would pass on to the Grievance Committee.
  7. Grievance Committee reconstituted under the aegis of Justice (retd) Pratibha Rani. Grievance Committee to function till OBE continues.
  8.  The redressal of complaints should be within 5 days.
  9. The announcement of the results of OBE should be in a short period.

The Court will next consider the matter on 22nd September to ascertain the compliance of its directions.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work, except the drinking water component...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years old (victim) at their home....

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of the Applicant to release him...

Proof of Infliction of Fatal Injury Not Mandatory for Conviction Under Section 307, IPC: Tripura High Court

In the case of Mamin Miah vs the State of Tripura, a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S....

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -