Patna High Court Allows BAMS Students Who Failed One or Two Second-Year Subjects to Appear in Third-Year Exams; Orders Special Exam for Missed Paper

The petitioners were students pursuing the Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) course under Aryabhatta Knowledge University.

Having failed in certain subjects in the Second Professional Examination, they appeared in the First Supplementary Examination conducted from 12 May 2026, but remained unsuccessful in one subject.

The result was published on 20 August 2026.

Meanwhile, the Third Professional Examination was scheduled from 25 August to 21 September 2026, but the petitioners were not permitted to appear.

They also alleged that the delayed conduct of the Second Supplementary Examination had caused them serious prejudice and risked loss of an academic year.

The University initially cited administrative difficulty but stated that it had no objection if the principals of the concerned colleges permitted the petitioners to appear.

Whether students who had failed in one or two subjects of the Second Professional BAMS Examination could be permitted to keep the term of the Third Professional Session under Clause 11(b)(ii) of the Notification dated 16 February 2022.

Whether the petitioners and similarly situated students could be permitted to appear in the ongoing Third Professional Examination despite not having cleared the Second Professional Supplementary Examination.

Whether students who could not appear in the Kaya Chikitsa Paper I examination scheduled for 25 August 2026 were entitled to a special re-examination.

The Court applied the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020, and the Commission’s Notification dated 16 February 2022, particularly Clause 11(b)(i), which contemplates the conduct of a Second Supplementary Examination, and Clause 11(b)(ii), which permits students failing in one or two subjects of the Second Professional Examination to keep the term of the Third, or final, Professional Session.

The Court also applied the principle that academic authorities must implement the governing regulatory framework in a manner that prevents students from suffering loss of an academic year due to institutional delay.

The Court found that the petitioners had failed in only one subject after appearing in the supplementary examination and therefore fell within the category covered by Clause 11(b)(ii).

The delayed conduct of the Second Supplementary Examination, particularly its failure to take place before the notification of the Third Professional Examination, was attributable to the concerned college and had prejudiced the students.

Since the regulatory notification expressly allowed students failing in one or two subjects to keep the term of the Third Professional Session, the University and colleges could not exclude the petitioners solely because they had not yet cleared the relevant subject.

The Court accordingly directed their admission to the ongoing examination and extended the relief to all identically situated students.

As the petitioners and similarly situated students could not appear in the Kaya Chikitsa Paper I examination on 25 August 2026, the Court ordered a special examination after completion of the Third Professional Examination.

The Examination Controller of Aryabhatta Knowledge University and the principals of the concerned colleges were directed to permit the petitioners and all similarly situated students who had failed in one or two subjects of the Second Professional Examination to appear in the ongoing Third Professional Examination.

A special examination was directed for Kaya Chikitsa Paper I for students unable to take that paper on 25 August 2026.

The University was directed to communicate the order to the colleges for compliance.

The Court clarified that its order would not prevent the University and colleges from conducting the Second Supplementary Examination within a reasonable time.