University Of Health Sciences Passes Three Students In Violation Of Rules

Lahore, The University of Health Sciences (UHS) has reassessed answer sheets of three candidates of private medical/dental colleges after declaration of results in sheer violation of varsity's examination rules, orders of the Syndicate and judgment of the Supreme Court.


The UHS Examination Department has conducted reassessment of answer sheets of three candidates i.e. Sabeen Zahid d/o Zahid Hussain (MBBS 2nd Professional Supplementary Examination 2006 from Lahore Medical and Dental College, Lahore), Hajra Shahid Khan d/o Shahid Yousaf Khan (MBBS 1st Professional Part-I Annual Examination 2006 from Wah Medical College, Wah Cantt), and Ayesha Mansha d/o Muhammad Mansha (BDS 1st Professional, Revised Scheme, Annual Examination 2006 from FMH, College of Medicine and Dentistry, Lahore) after declaration of results and passed them pass. The varsity by doing so violated examination rules and Supreme Court ruling and also discriminated against candidates who were not given a similar opportunity. It also exposed a nexus of UHS and its affiliated private medical/dental institutions working to manipulate results.

The UHS examination rules clearly state in Section 7 (vi): "The answer books of a candidate in any examination of the University shall not be reassessed after declaration of the result."

Section 7 (i) says: "After declaration of results, a candidate may apply to the Controller of Examinations for rechecking of his/her results." (vii) Whereas rechecking does not mean reassessment or re-evaluation of an answer book, the controller of examinations or any officer authorized by him or the Rechecking Committee approved by the vice-chancellor shall satisfy that the result of the candidate has been correctly compiled and declared."

The UHS Syndicate, in its 13th meeting, unanimously decided that before decoding, an 'audit' committee approved by the VC and convened by controller of examinations may audit the result and involve a convener of assessment, if deemed necessary, out of the panel of senior professors recommended by Board of Studies. The duties of convener of assessment will not be in contradiction to examination regulations.

Earlier, in compliance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and in conformity with the policy of PMDC and HEC, the syndicate in its 12th meeting and Board of Governors in its 10th meeting decided to abolish the system of grace marks or an increase in marks by any other name with effect from Annual Examination 2006.

Sources said that the UHS also adopted a system of 'rechecking' or 'audit' of answer sheets, failing by not more than three marks from benchmark to pass the subject, before the declaration of results to rule out any discrepancies in the compilation of results leaving no room, whatsoever, for any error or mistake in compilation/counting of results/marks. However, after declaration of results, a candidate may apply for rechecking or audit to remove his/her doubts regarding compilation of results but certainly not for reassessment of the answer sheet.

The sources pointed out another anomaly that these candidates had not moved their applications for rechecking within 10 days as Section 7 (iv) says: "Applications for rechecking shall be received in the office of the controller of examinations not later than 10 days after the date of declaration of the result of the examination." The rechecking of one candidate's answer sheets was directly recommended by the vice-chancellor.

As for individual cases, Sabeen Zahid d/o Zahid Hussain in MBBS 2nd Professional Supplementary Examination 2006 from Lahore Medical and Dental College, Lahore, Roll No 431, Fictitious No 1558 and Rechecking File No 1865, was awarded three extra numbers - one each in questions 8, 9 and 15 in the subject of General Pathology during reassessment after declaration of the result.

In order of events, the Rechecking Committee after Sabeen Zahid's application for rechecking, declared that the candidate had failed after thorough rechecking the answer sheet. Later, the UHS called Dr Fauzia Iqbal Butt, Professor of Pathology, AIMC, Lahore, as Convener of Assessment for an audit of answer sheet bearing Fictitious No 1558, but she also declared in writing that "no question or part of question was found unmarked. The standard of assessment of paper is satisfactory and the marks given are correct. The total of marks is also correct."

Afterwards, the UHS appointed Dr Abdul Hannan Nagi, Professor of Pathology at LMDC, Lahore, as convener of assessment but he again gave an all-clear report.

After failing in their attempts, the UHS thrashed out all candidates failing by just three marks in the subject of General Pathology in an attempt to clear the 'deserving candidate' bearing Fictitious No 1558 and appointed Dr Maleeha Aslam, Professor of Pathology at AIMC, Lahore, as convener of assessment. However, she also endorsed the results of the 21 candidates including the candidate with Fictitious No 1558. So much so that she gave in writing that marking was towards the lenient side.

However, out of the 21 candidates, the candidate with Fictitious No 1558 was lucky that the UHS Examination Department desperately took up the case again and once again appointed Dr AH Nagi, Professor of Pathology at LMDC, Lahore, as convener of assessment, who finally awarded three marks - one each in Qs 8, 9 & 15 - on the basis that 'some parts of these questions were left unmarked'. Dr AH Nagi is presently Professor of Pathology at UHS, while another professor of LMDC was appointed as a member of Board of Governors of UHS a few months ago.

Following this development, the Head of Rechecking Committee objected to the change in marks of questions 8, 9 and 15, saying it amounted to reassessment/re-evaluation which was against rules and regulations.

However, the controller of examinations, on the instructions of the vice-chancellor, asked the professor concerned to clarify the discrepancy between the statements in the script and the audit reports. The professor concerned apologised for his earlier audit report and presented the 'solution' that some portions of questions 8, 9 and 15 were left unmarked in the second audit report and awarded three marks, which was accepted by the controller of examinations and approved by the vice-chancellor.

However, the assistant controller of examinations (secrecy) wrote a letter, dated June 26, 2007, to LMDC Principal with reference to rechecking application of Sabeen Zahid, Roll No. 431, of MBBS 2nd Professional Supplementary Examination 2006, conveying that Rechecking Committee checked the answer books/records/practical awards and no discrepancies were found.

Despite this communication by the assistant controller of examinations (secrecy), the UHS Examination Department issued a notification dated August 7, 2007, declaring that the candidate Roll No 431 had passed.

In case of Hajra Shahid Khan d/o Shahid Yousaf Khan in MBBS 1st Professional (Part-I) Annual Examination 2006, bearing Roll No 129, Fictitious No 7124 and Rechecking File No 1554 from Wah Medical College, Wah Cantt, the UHS Examination Department also awarded 1.5 marks in questions 1 and 2 in the subject of Anatomy to enhance the existing 2.5 marks to total of 4 marks in post-result reassessment of answer books.

In yet another case of Ayesha Mansha d/o Muhammad Mansha in BDS 1st Professional (Revised Scheme), Annual Examination 2006, Roll No 69, Fictitious No 808 and Rechecking File No 1452 from FMH, College of Medicine and Dentistry, Lahore, the UHS Examination Department also awarded one extra mark in questions 1 and 2 in Anatomy to increase the existing 2 marks to total of 3 marks in post result reassessment of answer books.

In both these cases, the UHS appointed Dr Mustansir Billah, Professor of Anatomy CMH/Lahore Medical College, Lahore, as the convener of assessment, who prepared separate award lists, instead of amending marks on Paper Assessors' award lists, to increase the required number of marks. However, the controller of examinations rejected the new award lists and himself amended the original award lists.

In original award list of candidate's paper with Fictitious No 7124, prepared by Paper Assessor Dr Muhammad Sohail, FPGMI/Sheikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore, the Controller of Examinations added 1.5 marks to existing 2.5 marks in questions 1 and 2 to increase to a total of 4 marks required to pass in the said subject.

In original award list of candidate paper bearing Fictitious No 808, prepared by Paper Assessor Dr Syed Tariq, Professor of Anatomy, Nishtar Medical College, Multan, the controller of examinations added 1 mark to existing 2 marks in questions 1 and 2 to increase to a total of 3 marks required to pass in the said subject.

The UHS, after conducting reassessment, referred the case to Rechecking Committee, which then 'rectified' the mistake in final counting of marks and declared that the candidates had passed the examinations. Later, the UHS Examination Department issued notifications, dated February 27, 2007, declaring that the candidates pass in their respective examinations.

Sources said that both these candidates, MBBS 1st Professional (Part-I) Annual Examination 2006 and BDS 1st Professional (Revised Scheme), Annual Examination 2006, had failed in their last chance to continue their medical education, but the UHS Examination Department misused its authority and arbitrarily passed them to carry on their medical education.

Courts had also rejected pleas of several candidates, particularly failing by just 1 mark in their last chance in First Professional BDS or MBBS (Part-I&II), to award required grace mark(s) to promote to the next level of Second Professional BDS or MBBS in order to continue their medical education.

When contacted, UHS Vice Chancellor Prof Hussain Mubashar Malik and Controller of Examinations Dr Junaid Sarfraz were unavailable for comments.