Up to 80% of answers not assessed in taxation law papers, find final-year students; Mumbai University says it was ‘human error'
Mumbai: Many final-year law students from Mumbai University were stumped to see up to 80% of their answers were not assessed in the photocopies of their answersheets. Mumbai University, in a statement, admitted that it was a human error and said action has been initiated.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
When many students scored in single digits in their Law of Taxation paper in the three-year LLB programme, they applied for photocopies, and found that many of the questions were marked as 'Not Attempted'.
A student said he was shocked to get only 10 marks in the Law of Taxation paper when he got the results on June 9. He cleared all other subjects. "I am a commerce student and was confident about clearing the taxation paper.
When I sought the photocopy of my answersheet, it showed that only 16 marks of the 75-mark question paper was assessed. The remaining questions were not touched by the examiner," said the student. When he approached the university, he found many more students had come with the same grievance.
"In our group alone, we have 96 affected students from across law colleges," he said, adding that many are waiting to appear for the Bar Council exams, or seek admissions to LLM, or to get placed.
He further said that they did not any satisfactory response from the examination office. The students are now seeking an corrective action at the earliest.
The director of the board of examinations said the number of evaluators for law papers is very low. "After reviewing the answer sheets, it was found that a few questions were assessed. This mistake was due to a human error, the concerned examiners have been informed and action has been taken," said the official.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Time of India
Up to 80% of answers not assessed in taxation law papers, find final-year students; Mumbai University says it was ‘human error'
Mumbai: Many final-year law students from Mumbai University were stumped to see up to 80% of their answers were not assessed in the photocopies of their answersheets. Mumbai University, in a statement, admitted that it was a human error and said action has been initiated. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now When many students scored in single digits in their Law of Taxation paper in the three-year LLB programme, they applied for photocopies, and found that many of the questions were marked as 'Not Attempted'. A student said he was shocked to get only 10 marks in the Law of Taxation paper when he got the results on June 9. He cleared all other subjects. "I am a commerce student and was confident about clearing the taxation paper. When I sought the photocopy of my answersheet, it showed that only 16 marks of the 75-mark question paper was assessed. The remaining questions were not touched by the examiner," said the student. When he approached the university, he found many more students had come with the same grievance. "In our group alone, we have 96 affected students from across law colleges," he said, adding that many are waiting to appear for the Bar Council exams, or seek admissions to LLM, or to get placed. He further said that they did not any satisfactory response from the examination office. The students are now seeking an corrective action at the earliest. The director of the board of examinations said the number of evaluators for law papers is very low. "After reviewing the answer sheets, it was found that a few questions were assessed. This mistake was due to a human error, the concerned examiners have been informed and action has been taken," said the official.
Indian Express
9 hours ago
- Indian Express
Law students cite evaluation errors in answer sheets; MU says human oversight
Several students at Mumbai University alleged evaluation errors in the answer sheets of semester examinations of three-year and five-year Law courses. Students claimed that they were incorrectly marked as having failed, with some sections of answer sheets marked as 'Not Attempted' (NA), despite the questions being answered. The university said that the error occurred due to human oversight, and action has been initiated against the evaluator concerned. The university had conducted exams for the sixth semester of the three-year law course and the tenth semester of the five-year law course between April 16 and April 30. After the results were announced on June 9, several students were marked as failed in subjects like Tax Law and the Indian Evidence Act. These students then applied for photocopies of their answer sheets, as per the regular process to opt for re-evaluation of the papers. However, the photocopies revealed that evaluation was not done in many cases. Despite students having written answers, many questions were ultimately marked with the remark 'NA'. One of the affected students said, 'I scored 33 out of 60. But the photocopy of the answer-sheet reveals that a 14-mark question was not evaluated at all.' A student activist, Sachin Pawar, who was approached by many of these students, said, 'This is a serious concern. The university's callous approach is dangerous for students' future. The varsity should conduct a re-evaluation of all papers of these subjects and declare a fresh result.' In a written response to the issue, Mumbai University's Director of Board of Examinations and Evaluations, Pooja Raundale, said, 'In the Law faculty, the number of evaluators is significantly low. In connection with the complaint, upon reviewing the answer sheets of the concerned students, it was found that Question No. 01(i) and Question No. 4(c) had not been evaluated. This error occurred due to human oversight, and action has been initiated against the concerned evaluator. The university will implement necessary improvements in the computer system to ensure such errors do not recur.'
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Is anything real anymore? AI testimonials take over the American justice system
Generative AI has been developing at a breakneck pace since the high-profile release of ChatGPT in November 2022. The Large Language Model (LLM) garnered massive media recognition for its ability to write complex and coherent responses to simple prompts. Other AI LLMs such as and Microsoft's 'Sydney' (now the AI copilot) also gained media notoriety for the manner in which they seemed to mimic human emotions to an uncanny degree. Written text is not the only area where AI has a disruptive effect, with image generation algorithms such as Midjourney, and video generation programs such as Google Veo progressively blurring the line between what's made by humans, and what's made by AI. Google Veo, in particular, became infamous for generating short videos resembling viral social media posts that had netizens wondering how convincing they looked. These rapid developments in AI technology have led to increased concerns about their disruptive impact on everyday life, and this has now begun to happen in the courtrooms of the United States. AI testimonies are now a part of the US court system AI video is now being introduced as a kind of posthumous testimony in court trials. During a manslaughter sentencing hearing where the victim was an American male named Christopher Pelkey, shot and killed in a road rage incident, an AI video of Perkley played where he gave an impact statement. The video had the AI say 'To Gabriel Horcasidas, the man who shot me, it is a shame we encountered each other that day, under those circumstances…I believe in forgiveness, and a God who forgives and I always have. I still do.' Pelkey's sister, Stacy Wales, had given her own testimony during the sentencing hearing, but didn't feel that her own words alone could properly convey the extent of her grief. Christopher Pelkey was killed in a road rage incident in Chandler in 2021, but last month, artificial intelligence brought him back to life during his killer's sentencing hearing. At the end of the hearing, Gabriel Horcasidas was sentenced to 10.5 years in prison. The ruling has since been appealed, shining a spotlight on the disruptive impact AI tech is already having on America's court system. Speaking to the Associated Press, AI deepfake expert David Evan Harris said that the technology might end up stacking the deck in favour of the wealthy and privileged: 'I imagine that will be a contested form of evidence, in part because it could be something that advantages parties that have more resources over parties that don't,' In one of the viral Google Veo videos that took the internet by storm, an AI generated girl says: 'This is wild. I'm AI generated by Veo 3. Nothing is real anymore.' We are Veo 3 just broke the internet.10 wild examples 1. Nothing is real anymore With the increasing normalization of AI technology in everyday life, as well as vital civic avenues such as criminal justice, the impacts of such technologies are sure to be dissected and studied for years to come.
