38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, March 16, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Bombay High Court Directs Pune University to re-calculate Administrative Law marks obtained by 9th Semester Law student due to Arithmetical Error as claimed by the student [READ ORDER]

By Prachi Misra      15 July, 2020 01:20 PM      0 Comments
Bombay High Court Directs Pune University

On Monday, 13th July 2020 Bombay High Court directed Savitribai Phule Pune University and Director, Board of Examination, and Evaluation to recalculate the marks obtained in Administrative Law subject in the Ninth semester of 5 years LLB course held in December 2019. There was a contention that there has been an arithmetical error in calculating the marks.

There was a Writ Petition filed by Varad Kolhe who secured 41 marks in Administrative law and contended that there has been an arithmetic mistake in adding up the marks awarded to him. This petition was heard by a Division Bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice NR Borkar. 

The court directed the university to recalculate the marks obtained without re-evaluating the answers given by the petitioner. 

Senior Advocate AV Anturkar along with Advocate Ranjit Shinde and Advocate Ajinkya Udane appeared on behalf of the Petitioner and contended that there has been an arithmetic mistake in evaluating the marks in the said paper. As per him, he should have obtained 61 marks instead of 41 marks.

Whereas, appearing on behalf of the University and Director, Board of Exams Advocate Rajendra Anbhute sought to take instructions from the moderator and then file an affidavit. 

Advocate Anbhute, in defense, submitted that on a re-calculation of marks, the petitioner will be entitled to 43 marks maximum and not 61 as claimed by him.

Finally, the bench said-

Considering the rival submissions, we direct Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to re-calculate the marks awarded to the petitioner in the Administrative Law paper without in any manner re-evaluating the answers given by the petitioners. Let the above exercise be completed and result thereof be placed before the court on the next date.

The next date of hearing is 16th July 2020.

 

[READ ORDER] 



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

tarun-holi-murder-case-delhi-police-पर-क्यों-नाराज़-हैं-पड़ोसी-law-street-journal
Trending Videos
Tarun Holi Murder Case: Delhi Police पर क्यों नाराज़ हैं पड़ोसी? || Law Street Journal

In this ground report on the Tarun Holi Murder Case, the team of Law Street Journal reaches Uttam Nagar, Delhi, where a shocking incident during Holi celebrations allegedly led to the death of a young man, Tarun. The dispute reportedly began after a Holi balloon thrown by a child accidentally hit a woman, which later escalated into a violent confrontation.

10 March, 2026 07:33 PM
itat-mumbai-deletes-1159-crore-addition-under-section-69a-brokers-papers-and-retracted-statement-held-insufficient
Trending Judiciary
ITAT Mumbai Deletes ₹11.59 Crore Addition Under Section 69A; Broker’s Papers and Retracted Statement Held Insufficient [Read Order]

Mumbai ITAT deletes ₹11.59 crore addition under Section 69A, holding broker’s papers and a retracted statement insufficient to prove alleged on-money receipts.

11 March, 2026 04:41 PM
prosecution-is-not-persecution-re-examining-the-constitutional-role-of-the-state-in-indias-criminal-justice-system-under-the-crpc-and-the-bnss
Trending Vantage Points
Prosecution is Not Persecution: Re-Examining the Constitutional Role of the State in India’s Criminal Justice System under the CrPC and the BNSS

Advocate Udit Arora examines how prosecution under CrPC and BNSS remains a constitutional duty—balancing justice, fairness, victim rights and protection of the innocent.

11 March, 2026 05:16 PM
sc-dismisses-mcgms-challenge-to-arbitral-award-holds-conduct-of-party-relevant-to-decide-jurisdictional-challenge
Trending Judiciary
SC Dismisses MCGM’s Challenge to Arbitral Award, Holds Conduct of Party Relevant to Decide Jurisdictional Challenge [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court dismisses MCGM’s challenge to arbitral award, holds party conduct relevant while deciding jurisdictional objections under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act.

13 March, 2026 12:31 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email