Awasthi, whose public interest litigation (PIL) against AIBE was rejected by the Supreme Court in August last year even before even the BCI moved its transfer petition, has approached the Delhi High Court for three-pronged relief based on different grounds this time.
“To declare statement of marks scored by Advocate aspirants in the scheduled All India Bar Examination dated: 06.03.2011. To declare on its website, answers to the questions to be asked in the scheduled All India Bar Examination dated: 06.03.2011 within a week of examination. Refrain from awarding prizes to the best scorers in the scheduled All India Bar Examination,” Awasthi stated in his petition.
According to Awasthi, disclosing the AIBE results scored by candidates is imperative to cross-check and prevent errors that may crop up due to faulty computer programming and “to enable advocate-aspirants to calculate their chances of qualifying exam and to make representation in case of wrong answers, if any, erroneously crept in the answer list”.
The outcome of Awasthi’s petition would be known tomorrow when it is likely to be listed before the court for admission, he said.
Citing a Legally India article in the petition that the BCI would award the three highest scores in the All India Bar Examination with prizes in the name of Shri M.K. Nambyar, Shri N.A. Palakhiwala and Hon’ble Justice Mr. H.R. Khanna, he added in his petition: “Such awards may amount pseudo-branding of certain advocates as super-talented advocates within the young lot and hence shall frustrate the purpose of very examination, which otherwise is just a screening entry level Examination. If the said examination is intended to be a competitive examination and the toppers are to be rewarded, then marks obtained by each of the candidates have to be made known.”
Yesterday the Bombay High Court clubbed the last of the remaining high court writ petitions against the bar exam into the pending Supreme Court case.
The AIBE will be held this Sunday on 6 March 2011.
Click here to download the petition.
Photo by comedynose
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
all the best to all the 2010 batch advocates!
I THINK GIVING PASS OR FAIL CERTIFICATE IS SUFFICIENT RATHER THAN DISCLOSING THE MARKS TOO...N AS FAR AS THE PRIZES R CONCERNED THAT SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED....IN THIS THEY CAN BE BIASED...
Everybody is arguing that there is no validity for the exam, why fighting for the ranks and marks.
The judiciary is closed their eyes instead of clearing the problem before the exam they are watching the fun played by RM and BCI with young new lawyers and their career.
SC is not going to take up the issue before 6th March, it seems, after the exam they will say that the exam is over and case will be is closed. Once exam is over who is interested to come here and argue for the past issue. Hence, SC must take up the issue before the exam date and check up the validity of the exam and on what basis RM is conducting etc., etc.
No.11,
First part consists 11 subjects 77 questions and 77 marks, out of 77 we have to score 31 marks. In 2nd part 9 subjects 23 questions should be answered, out of 23 we have to score 9 marks, so total 40 out of 100 marks. In 2nd part they are covering 5 subjects only (may be some important subjects) according to RM and BCI instructions.
I wish everybody good luck hope for the best.
Thanks.
Disclosure of marks will just create a further divide between the high scorers and the ones who just passed. This exam is not about marks but just a processing of whetting. (Irrespective of the fact that how the exam was conducted or the mass cheating being witnessed by many)
ROFL
Get a life dude.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first