Kochi: The High Court of Kerala has upheld the Kerala University of Health Sciences' (KUHS) decision to debar three MBBS students of Azeezia Medical College at Meeyannoor in Kollam for five years in an impersonation case.
Upholding the KUHS decision, the high court observed that the incident exposed the bid by a group of people to sabotage the examination system and the breach of exam guidelines.
While rejecting the petition by students Pranav Mohan, Nabeel Sajid and Midhun Jemsin against the university's decision to debar them, Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan directed the police to conduct a fair probe to bring out the truth. The court's observations should not influence the investigation, he said.
The malpractice was found in the third year MBBS Part-I examination held in January 2021. It has been alleged that three others had written the examination. The students' answer booklets were later replaced by those of the impersonators.
It was also alleged that the chief examination superintendent and invigilator colluded with the students to 'leak' the question paper and answer booklet to impersonators.
The university debarred the students based on a report by its Malpractices and Lapses Enquiry Committee. The students approached the high court after the vice-chancellor had rejected their appeal against KUHS's decision.
Foul play
The university explained the malpractice at the high court. The petitioner students deliberately appeared late, and pretended as if they were writing the exam. Meanwhile, three others were writing the exam on their behalf elsewhere in the college.
The incident came to light due to an error committed while replacing the answer booklets. The university despatches the answer booklet for evaluation in a separate packet after detaching a slip having the barcode and registration number. The barcode and number would be cross-checked after evaluation.
The university's IT wing found a mismatch during data analysis and reported the matter to higher-ups. Besides registering a police case, the university had also recommended action against the chief examination superintendent, invigilators and IT employees.
Sections
