Though the University's decision to do so is still mysterious since the Maharashtra University Act clearly specifies that a university cannot tamper with declared results, the MMC investigations have revealed that two students with roll numbers 601 an 894 respectively were the prime beneficiaries.

The MMC has since recommended the withrawal of the grace marks to all students and asked for fresh assessment of all the papers.

An analysis of the relevant data provided by the medical colleges under the University revealed the two students to be Pragnesh Shashikant Panchal (601), a student of the Seth G S Medical College and KEM Hospital, and Sandeep Vijaykumar Vaidya (894), a student of the LTM Medical College and Sion Hospital. Both thecolleges are run by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation.According to a senior member of the MMC team, they found that in the first result of the final MBBS declared on January 12, Panchal was declared fail. Panchal had obtained 274 out of 500 in medicine, 212 out of 400 in surgery, 140 out of 200 in ENT, 152 out of 200 in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and 109 out of 200 in Preventive and Social Medicine. He was declared fail since had obtained 43 out of 100 in the theory examination of Preventive and Social Medicine.

He was short of seven marks for passing the examination.With the university's decision to grant eight marks to the failing candidates, Panchal was not only declared pass, but also obtained a distinction in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Usually students are not awarded distinction if they have been given grace marks in any subject but this once the University conveniently omitted the asterisk in the mark-sheets that denote grace marks have been awarded. The omission helped another student, SandeepVaidya obtain distinction. In the first result, Vaidya had secured 317 out of 500 marks in medicine, 299 out of 400 in Surgery, 144 out of 200 in ENT, 143 out of 200 in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and 105 out of 200 in Preventive and Social Medicine. Though Vaidya had secured distinction in Surgery with 299 marks out of 400, it was not mentioned in his marksheet since he had already passed in Preventive and Social Medicine with seven grace marks. (According to a University regulation if a student has failed in one subject but has an aggregate of over 50 per cent then that plus aggregate translates into grace marks. For instance, Panchal in the first result had obtained 829 out of a total of 1500 that is 55.26 per cent.

This entitled him to 5 to 6 grace marks but he actually required seven marks to pass. Whereas in Vaidya's case he received 946 out of 1500 marks and scored an aggregate of 63.06 per cent. So even though he also needed seven marks to pass in the PSM paper his extra aggregate entitled him tothe required seven grace marks.) But subsequently when the ``corrected'' results were declared on January 25, the asterisk was no longer there on his marksheet and he was awarded the distinction.

MBBS Marks Scam

Using its quasi-judicial powers, the MMC panel probing the marks scandal has issued summons to Controller of Examinations A Y Joglekar to appear before it on Wednesday. Joglekar had earlier spurned the MMC `request' to co-operate in the probe, hence the summons.