Kerala High Court
Johan Varghese vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 31 August, 2017
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/19TH KARTHIKA, 1939
WP(C).No. 32751 of 2017 (T)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
----------
JOHAN VARGHESE,
AGED 21 YEARS, NJATTUMKALAYIL HOUSE, KADAYIRUPPU P.O,
KOLENCHERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 311.
BY ADV. SRI.BENNY VARGHESE
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, BY ITS REGISTRAR,
PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM - 686 520.
2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM - 686 520.
3. THE PRINCIPAL,
VISWAJYOTI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY,
VAZHAKULAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST, PIN - 686 670.
R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC,
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 10-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
K.V.
WP(C).No. 32751 of 2017 (T)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST SHOWING THE MARK
OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE 8TH SEMESTER
EXAMINATION CONDUCTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE FATHER
OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY
DATED 31.08.2017.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER FOIL OF THE POSTAL ORDER.
EXHIBIT P4 THE RECEIPT SHOWING SENDING OF THE POSTAL ORDER TO THE
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 20.09.2017.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD SHOWING THE
RECEIPT OF THE ENVELOPE CONTAINING THE COUNTER FOIL OF
THE POSTAL ORDER ON 22.09.2017.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COURSE
REGULATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.10.2017 OBTAINED
UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT RECEIVED FROM THE
1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
-----------------------
/TRUE COPY/
K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.32751 of 2017
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of November, 2017
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner has passed his B.Tech degree in Computer Science and Engineering from the 3rd respondent college. In the examination conducted in May 2017, petitioner passed all subjects in all semesters and secured 59.94% marks, evident from Ext.P1. Petitioner got 'C' grade in the subject 'High Performance Computing' (Subject Code CS010801) and 'D' grade in 'Artificial Intelligence' (Subject Code CS10802). In Ext.P1, the aggregate marks obtained by the petitioner in all subjects for B.Tech degree examination is 5185 out of 8650 marks. Therefore, petitioner intends to improve the marks in the above two subjects by appearing for the examination to be conducted in the next semester examination i.e., during November, 2017. According to the petitioner, 1st respondent has taken away the right for improving the two theory papers of the last semester in the immediate semester examination as W.P.(C) No.32751 of 2017 2 stated in Ext.P6 Course Regulations prevailing from 2010. It is thus seeking appropriate direction, this writ petition is filed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the University.
3. The subject matter of issue raised in the writ petition revolves round clause 13 of Ext.P6 Regulations, which read thus:
"13. Improvement Candidates shall be allowed to improve the grade of any two theory subjects in a semester. This can be done only in the immediate subsequent chance. If the candidate gets more marks in the improvement chance, marks scored in the improvement chance will be considered for grading in the subject; otherwise marks scored in the first attempt will be retained. No candidate shall be permitted to improve the marks scored in practical examinations and internal continuous assessment."
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the University W.P.(C) No.32751 of 2017 3 submitted that, the regulation applicable to the petitioner is Ext.P6 and therefore, appropriate direction may be issued. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that, necessary fee for participating in the improvement examination is also paid by the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the University to consider the application submitted by the petitioner and if there are no other legal impediments standing in the way, permit the petitioner to improve the subjects specified above and in accordance with law. Necessary arrangement shall be made by the 3rd respondent in accordance with the directions contained above and issued by the University pursuant to the direction made above.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE smv 10.11.2017