‘Courts Can’t Bend Rules’: Karnataka HC Denies MBBS Student Mercy Attempt Beyond 4 Tries to Clear Exam
The Karnataka High Court dismisses MBBS student's plea for a fifth exam attempt
The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a plea by a medical student seeking permission to appear for her first-year MBBS Biochemistry exam for a fifth time, terming it contrary to the rules framed by the university and the National Medical Commission (NMC).
The order was passed by the bench of Justice R. Devdas on September 25, 2025, in a petition filed by Miss Nishat R. Kolyal, a 24-year-old first-year MBBS student of Dr. Ambedkar Medical College and Hospital, Bengaluru.
The petitioner had approached the court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution after being denied another chance to clear her Biochemistry paper, the only subject she had not passed.
Represented by advocate Chandrakanth R. Goulay, Kolyal pleaded for a direction to the authorities, including the Union of India, the NMC, the State of Karnataka, the Directorate of Medical Education, the Karnataka Examinations Authority, and Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS), to permit her a “mercy attempt” to appear for both Paper I and II of Biochemistry during the September/October 2025 session.
The student argued that her request was a compassionate plea, as she had successfully cleared all other papers and needed just one more opportunity to complete her first-year MBBS. Her representations to various authorities, dated June 27 and July 14, 2025, were placed before the court as annexures.
However, court made it clear that it had no authority to issue directions contrary to binding academic regulations.
Justice Devdas observed that both RGUHS and the NMC explicitly stipulate a maximum of four attempts for clearing first-year subjects.
“The law is very clear in this regard. No court can pass an order contrary to the regulations and norms prescribed by the university,” the order stated.
The bench noted that the petitioner’s plea was not based on any violation of procedure or arbitrariness but purely on compassionate grounds. While acknowledging the petitioner’s predicament, the court held that judicial sympathy cannot replace statutory mandates.
Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with court stating that it could not grant any relief inconsistent with the norms governing medical education.
"The law is very clear in this regard. No Court can pass an order contrary to the Regulations and norms prescribed by the university," the order read.
Case Title: Miss. Nishat R Kolyal vs UOI and Others
Order Date: September 25, 2025
Bench: Justice R Devdas