Index Medical College integrity under shadow: HC

Indore: The integrity and working of Index Medical College have come under a shadow with the Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court, raising questions on the college enhancing practical marks of three MBBS students,(who had been declared failed) and sending the same to Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya (DAVV) for updating of results.

The court of the division bench of Justice Virendra Singh and Justice PK Jaiswal rejected the plea asking for a modification of result, stating that the college had colluded with the petitioner(Students) and revised the practical marks.

The DAVV had declared the 2^nd professional exam results on May 27.

Vaibhav Trivedi, Siddharth Shukla and Rishi Chaturvedi, are the three students who had been declared failures. However, the three petitioning students claimed that they had been declared as a failure due to an error on the part of the college in printing practical exam marks, in the counterfoil sent to the university; on the basis of which the results were declared.

The college is also believed to have consented to have erred and declared having sent a revised counterfoil to the university on June 6, urging for an update. However, the college request was not conceded to.

The university clarified that the result had not been updated despite student request, for the court did not find any mistake in the March 5 counter foil submission, which had been countersigned by one internal and two external experts.

The students in disagreement with the university's stance, moved court seeking court directive for the university to change their results, on the basis of the second counterfoil.

The court on hearing all sides spoke of its observation of the second counterfoil dated June 6 to be carrying Feb 2 as the date on the top, while mentioning June 6 as the date at the bottom, next to the signatures of the 2 external examiners

"Earlier, the college submitted the counterfoil on March 3 and thereafter, second counter foil itself creates prima-facie doubt in mind. We find no error or mistake committed on part of the university," the judges observed.

The Judges also observed that the college in collusion with the petitioners issued a letter dated June 6, stating oversight to have led to the college not entering the student's marks correctly. To this statement, the court observed: "This shows the working and integrity of the college."

The court on the basis of the above observation concluded that as there was no mathematical or clerical error in the process of calculation or computerization of marks. Therefore, the question of direction to the university to modify the marks on the basis of the 2^nd counterfoil, dated June 6, did not arise, reported the FPJ.