A law student has filed a petition with the Bombay High Court after a professor tore his answer sheet when he requested additional supplements during an exam.

A division bench, comprising Justices Atul Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil, has issued a notice to DY Patil Law College in Pimpri.

The bench has also directed the authorities to preserve the CCTV footage from the exam hall and the principal's cabin, where the incident occurred.

"Issue notice to the respondents, made returnable on July 18. There shall be an interim relief in terms of prayer clause F in the petition (for preserving CCTV footages)," the bench said in its order.

The bench issued a notice regarding the petition filed by Gaurav Kakade, a fourth-year law student at DY Patil Law College.

In his petition, submitted through Advocate Sanket Bora, the student, Gaurav Kakade, emphasized that he has been a meritorious student since the first year of his five-year law course. He stated that just before his 8th-semester exams, he had emailed a request to the College Principal, asking for additional supplements for writing his answers, as the 36-page answer sheet was insufficient for him.

On June 11, during his Practical Training Paper (II) on Alternate Dispute Resolution, the petitioner alleged that the supervisor, a professor from the college, was in an inebriated condition.

The petition further alleges that the professor did not distribute the question papers 10 minutes prior to the exam, as required. When students raised concerns, he assured them of additional time. After completing his paper, the petitioner approached the professor to submit it, whereupon the professor allegedly tore his answer sheets and mocked him for emailing the principal about needing extra supplements.

Following the incident, the petitioner claimed that he promptly reported the incident to the principal, who assured him of taking action. However, later on, both the Chief Examination Officer and the College Principal allegedly pressured the petitioner to sign an undertaking stating that he had engaged in "unfair means" during his exam. The petitioner, however, refused to comply with this demand.

Later, the petitioner stated that the principal initially agreed to his request to write his answers on a new sheet. However, when a new answer sheet was provided, he was only allowed to fill in his name and other details but was not permitted to write answers. Subsequently, he filed complaints with various authorities, emphasizing the impact of this incident on his academic career.

Subsequently, the Students Grievance Redressal Committee, headed by the College principal, issued a notice to the petitioner and heard his issue. According to the petition, the committee then submitted a report that was adverse to the petitioner.

The petitioner contended that this report was heavily biased against him, alleging that it was both inappropriate and inadequate. Consequently, he sought directions from the court to the College authorities to set aside and quash the report of the Students Grievance Redressal Committee. Additionally, he requested an appropriate order to ensure he was given a fair opportunity to submit his answersheet.