Dr.G.Seetharaman, v. The Vice Chancellor

O R D E R The present writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order passed by the second respondent herein, wherein, the request of the petitioner to round off his marks from 59.94% to 60% has been rejected.

¶2The petitioner herein had completed B.E., (Electronics and Communications) in the year 1997 at the Regional Engineering College, Tiruchirappalli, which falls under the jurisdiction of the second respondent University. The petitioner had secured 59.94% (Second Class) in the examinations. The petitioner had made a request on 26.12.2018 seeking to round off the marks to 60% so that he can be declared as having passed in the First Class. This request was rejected under the impugned order dated

02.05.2019 citing the delay as well as the regulations. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶3According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the petitioner having secured 59.94%, is only short of 0.06%. All other universities are following the procedure of rounding off the marks which would result in declaring the petitioner as having passed in the First Class. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.26855 of 2023, dated 03.11.2023 (K.Siva Vs.The University of Madras, Represented by its Registrar and another), wherein this Court has directed the University of Madras to round off 59.94% to 60%. This order was confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1869 of 2024, dated 01.09.2025.

¶4Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent University submitted that the classes of the candidates are declared only as per the University Regulations, and when there is no such provision for rounding off, the request of the petitioner cannot be entertained. He further submitted that, in case, if the request is entertained from one of the candidates, the same is likely to open the floodgates. That apart, though the petitioner has passed in the year 1997, the request has emanated after more than 20 years. In such circumstances, the order impugned in the writ petition may be sustained.

¶5I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶6The request of the petitioner is to round off his marks from 59.94% to 60% which would result in declaration of the result having passed in the First Class. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court while considering a similar submission made on the side of the Madras University in paragraph Nos.6 and 7 has held as follows:

¶6Normally, permitting rounding-off might not be mentioned in the Statutes, but, at the same time, if it is the intention of the Statute-makers of the University to prohibit such kind of rounding-off, the Statutes would certainly have a provision prohibiting such rounding-off. In the absence of any such provision to prohibit such rounding-off, there would be no impediment for the appellant University to go ahead with the rounding-off of the percentage.

¶7Moreover, this is not a competitive examination where a fraction of the mark would be a matter. It is only to issue Degree Certificate to show that whether the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to get a Degree Certificate with First Class or not. First Class mark is nothing but 60%, whereas, he has secured

59.94% which naturally has to be rounded-off to 60%. Being that, the denial of such rounding-off by the appellant University, as sought by the respondent/writ petitioner, is unjustifiable. Therefore, the valuable right of the respondent/writ petitioner to get promotional avenue in his career, where his promotion is due by the employer, is getting defeated.

¶7This judgment squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. In such a view of the matter, the order impugned in the writ petition is set aside and this Writ Petition stands allowed. The second respondent is directed to issue a fresh degree certificate to the petitioner to the effect that the petitioner has passed in the First Class in B.E., Degree Course. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

24.02.2026 NCC : Yes/No

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi To

¶1The Vice Chancellor, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli.

¶2The Registrar, Bharathidasan University, Trichirappalli. R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J. ebsi W.P(MD)No.14186 of 2019

24.02.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.02.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.14186 of 2019 Dr.G.Seetharaman ...Petitioner Vs 1. The Vice Chancellor, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli. 2. Bharathidasan University, Represented by its The Registrar, Trichirappalli. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made in LC/PIO/668/2019, dated 02.05.2019 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to round off the petitioner's mark from 59.94% to 60% and declare the petitioner as having obtained First Class in B.E., Degree Course and to issue Certificate. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Mr.K.Jeyamohan For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan Standing Counsel