University Directed to Allow Rhine Ghosh to Clear Semester and Publish Withheld Results After Recognizing Genuine Medical and Emotional Grounds for Absence
In a significant judgment delivered on September 29, 2026, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Jay Sengupta, granted relief to Rhine Ghosh, a student of the B.Com LL.B (Hons.) integrated course at St. Xavier's University, who was debarred from appearing in her sixth semester examination due to her attendance falling short of the mandatory 65% threshold. The court found that the university's rigid application of attendance rules without adequately considering genuine medical illness and personal distress was unjust and amounted to arbitrary discrimination.
Rhine Ghosh's attendance was recorded at 63.76% during the semester in question. The university rejected her request for condonation of absence on the ground that she failed to submit the medical certificate within the stipulated time frame and that her attendance was below the minimum limit to be eligible for condonation. The petitioner had suffered from chicken pox, which required a medically advised isolation period of 14 days, during which she missed 16 classes. She also presented evidence of severe gynecological problems involving multiple ovarian cysts, which further affected her attendance. Additionally, she endured emotional and financial distress following the death of her father in 2023 and had to undertake part-time work to support her studies.
The petitioner argued that the university had not enforced strict attendance compliance in previous semesters and had even condoned absences for other students whose attendance was below 65%, thereby creating an inconsistent and discriminatory practice. She also contended that the delayed submission of her medical certificate should not have been fatal, given the seriousness of her illness and the circumstances surrounding her absence.
The university, however, maintained that its regulations-framed under statutory authority-mandated a minimum 75% attendance, with condonation permitted only for those between 65% and 74%. It further contended that the petitioner's attendance was below the 65% threshold and that her medical certificate was submitted too late to be considered. The university also dismissed the death of the petitioner's father and her part-time work as grounds for condonation.
After examining the university's attendance regulations and the facts of the case, the court observed that while the discipline of attendance is essential to maintain educational standards, it must be applied with fairness and sensitivity. The court distinguished between the strict prior approval requirements for extra-curricular activities and the furnishing of medical certificates for illness. It held that a delay in submission of medical certificates in genuine cases of serious illness cannot be treated as fatal and that such certificates from independent medical professionals deserve due weight unless clearly erroneous.
Importantly, the court criticized the university's characterization of the petitioner's father's death as merely a "historical effect," noting that the emotional and financial consequences were immediate and significant, warranting compassionate consideration. The court suggested that the part-time acting assignments undertaken by the petitioner could have been treated as extra-curricular activities eligible for attendance adjustment.
The judgment directed that the petitioner should not be debarred from clearing the sixth semester or moving to the next semester on account of attendance shortfall. The court ordered the university to promptly publish all withheld examination results for the concerned and subsequent semesters and to evaluate any unevaluated answer scripts without delay. The petitioner was also entitled to receive all academic documents upon completion of the course.
This ruling underscores the importance of balancing strict adherence to academic regulations with humane consideration of students' genuine hardships and health issues. It also highlights the need for educational institutions to implement attendance policies consistently and transparently, avoiding arbitrary or discriminatory practices.
Bottom Line:
Education Law - University attendance regulations - Delay in submission of medical certificate for illness cannot be treated as fatal where genuine serious illness is established - Student suffering from chicken pox and gynecological issues, coupled with distress caused by father's death, entitled to attendance adjustment - University directed not to debar student for inadequate attendance and to publish withheld results.
Statutory provision(s):
St. Xavier's University, Kolkata Act, 2016 - Section 31(XVI);
University Regulations on Student Attendance - Clauses 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.6.1;
Article 14, Constitution of India (Right to Equality).
Rhine Ghosh v. St. Xavier's University, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2989210
