sub-imageதினமலர் டிவி
sub-imagePodcast
sub-imageiPaper
sub-imageசினிமா
sub-imageகோயில்கள்
sub-imageபுத்தகங்கள்
sub-imageSubscription
sub-imageதிருக்குறள்
sub-imageகடல் தாமரை
Dinamalar Logo

திங்கள், நவம்பர் 03, 2025 ,ஐப்பசி 17, விசுவாவசு வருடம்

டைம்லைன்


தற்போதைய செய்தி


தினமலர் டிவி


ப்ரீமியம்


தமிழகம்


இந்தியா


உலகம்


வர்த்தகம்


விளையாட்டு


கல்விமலர்


டீ கடை பெஞ்ச்


/

செய்திகள்

/

Kalvimalar

/

News

/

Delhi HC asks panel to respond to doctor's plea for revaluation in exam

/

Delhi HC asks panel to respond to doctor's plea for revaluation in exam

Delhi HC asks panel to respond to doctor's plea for revaluation in exam

Delhi HC asks panel to respond to doctor's plea for revaluation in exam


UPDATED : ஆக 29, 2025 12:00 AM

ADDED : ஆக 29, 2025 09:02 AM

Google News

UPDATED : ஆக 29, 2025 12:00 AM ADDED : ஆக 29, 2025 09:02 AM


Google News
நிறம் மற்றும் எழுத்துரு அளவு மாற்ற

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought a response from the National Board of Examination (NBE) on a doctor's plea for revaluation in the Diplomate National Board (DNB) examination.

Justice Vikas Mahajan issued notices to the NBE and the Centre on the petition filed by a DNB trainee doctor at Gangaram Hospital in Delhi. The court asked the NBE counsel to obtain instructions and posted the matter for August 29.

The petitioner challenged the “arbitrary” condition in the August 14 notice and clause 5.3 of the information bulletin, which allows revaluation only if an answer is wrongly marked as “not attempted.” Represented by advocate Tanvi Dubey, the doctor argued that the condition precludes revaluation in other circumstances, including the present case where evaluation allegedly led to a substantial discrepancy between the actual and expected scores.

The plea said the answer sheets show clear discrepancies, but the lack of a revaluation option prevents transparency. It described the clause allowing revaluation only for unattempted questions as “totally vitiated,” denying the petitioner a way to address errors in her answer key.

The petitioner sought revaluation, not grace marks, and claimed denial of proper evaluation caused irreparable prejudice, as she was unjustly declared unsuccessful in the theory exam. “As a consequence, she has been deprived of her right to appear in the practical examination, wasting years of academic training and affecting her professional career and future prospects,” the plea said.

imgpaper

Advertisement



Trending





      Dinamalar
      Follow us