By CHESTER NGAN 

A Masters student suing Monash University over a failed assessment task says he is willing to submit a new assignment.

Journalism student Chinmay Naik has asked the Victorian Supreme Court to grant him exemption from the assessment result and declare an overall pass grade for the unit.

The 23-year-old also told the court yesterday he would be willing to do a fresh assignment if the university agreed to it.

He had applied for and was granted an extension and special consideration by the university for more time to complete the task, due to mental health issues.

Monash University counsel Emily Latif argued that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction over his assessment grade – as the court did not have academic expertise – but only over the lawfulness of the procedures.

She said Mr Naik sought something the court could not provide and as such argued the case should not go to trial. 

Justice Melinda Richards said she would not be making any academic judgments and could not grant Mr Naik exemption to pass his assignment.

Students undertaking the journalism unit had to produce a current affairs-style video as part of the assessment, and Mr Naik based his video on the negative stereotypes associated with certain breeds of dogs.

According to court documents, the assessor believed it “was not of sufficient standard to meet the minimum requirements needed for a pass”.

Mr Naik was given a grade of 12 out of 100, which was later re-marked and increased to 21 out of 100.

He claimed the person who re-marked his assignment was the same lecturer who graded it the first time, which he believed was “unlawful” and a violation of university policy.

"I believe I have the right to know the identity of the second marker,” he said. 

However, Ms Latif assured the court there was a second marker, but the university did not have to reveal their identity.

She also told the court the second marker did not wish to reveal their identity due to the “scrutiny that might follow”.

Before taking this case to the Supreme Court, the aspiring journalist sought to resolve the matter through the Human Rights Commission, the Victorian Ombudsman and even took it to the Prime Minister’s office, but was unsuccessful.

In yesterday’s court hearing, Mr Naik requested an extra 28 days to gather more evidence, however, Justice Richards refused. Ms Latif also asked for the opportunity to prepare more evidence but her request was denied “for fairness”.

Justice  Richards is yet to make a decision on whether the case will go to trial.

Later, outside court, Mr Naik said: “I don’t think that I had a reasonable opportunity to do a task that could prove my potential as a journalist, purely because of the lack of time.

“If I’m given a reasonable opportunity to submit another task … I am willing to do something to the best of my ability.”

He said he did not accept the mark he received and believed “journalism is a subject of individual opinions”.

“If someone was friendly towards dogs and animal welfare issues, it may have gotten a 50 (out of 100), who knows?”