LAHORE, Oct 28: The University of Health Sciences (UHS) has revised the results of some candidates of MBBS and BDS examinations despite claims that it has introduced a strict and foolproof examination system.

It was learnt that the UHS had revised the results of three Allama Iqbal Medical College (AIMC) students, who appeared for the MBBS third professional annual examination last month, and declared them pass. The three candidates were earlier shown to have failed in the pathology paper in a result notification issued on Oct 20.

Similarly, the UHS also revised the results of two Nishtar Medical College (NMC) students, who appeared for the MBBS third professional annual examination in August, and declared them pass. Both the candidates were earlier shown to have failed in the community medicine paper in a result notification issued on Sept 9.

In yet another incident, the UHS uploaded the result notification of BDS third professional annual examination for 2003 on its website. The result on the web showed that Ansa Javed Akram (Roll Number 4), daughter of Prof Javed Akram , had secured 499 marks out of 600 marks and topped the examination. Ansa also secured a distinction in medicine.

However, the result notification communicated later showed that she had secured 449 marks and ranked as second. Ayefa Tariq Sheikh (Roll No 1), daughter of Sheikh Tariq Jamal, bagged the first position with 455 marks.

Talking to Dawn, Ms Ansa said the ‘revised’ result, which was yet to be received, had caused her great mental distress and disappointment. She said the new result had shaken her confidence in the transparency of the UHS examination system.

“Even if it was a mistake, nobody from the UHS bothered to apologize,” she said. She also desired that the UHS should look into the incident seriously and arrange an independent inquiry.

When contacted, UHS controller of examinations Dr Aftab Mohsin admitted that the results of three AIMC students and two NMC students had been revised, while the result of a BDS student on the university website was wrong.

Dr Mohsin said that three AIMC students results had been revised because the university had notified the results without counting the marks in a pathology practical. He claimed that the university later found that the mark-sheets received from examiners showed simple lines in front of the roll numbers and no marks. He said the university inadvertently declared the students fail but later received their practical examination marks, which were added to the results. The addition of practical examination marks helped both students clear the examination.

The controller of examinations said the UHS was currently handling the issue on its own. “An inquiry in this regard is under way.”

About the case of two NMC students, Dr Mohsin said both the students had earlier appeared as private candidates through the Bahauddin Zakariya University in the subjects of special pathology and community medicine. He claimed that the UHS had earlier received the results of special pathology only and inadvertently declared the students as failing in community medicine. “On receiving their community medicine papers results, we included them in both candidates’ overall results and declared them pass.”

Regarding the change of marks aggregate that also led to a change in positions in the BDS third professional annual examination, Dr Mohsin claimed that result of the candidate was never changed, but only wrong marks were posted in the result notification uploaded on the university website.

He blamed the university’s computer resource centre officials for uploading wrong information that caused embarrassment to the candidate concerned. He, however, said the university had corrected the information on the net as soon as it realized the mistake.

Answering a question, he said that he had called for an explanation from the official concerned.