IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 25388 of 2009(P)
1. SHAHAD.M., BDS STUDENT,
... Petitioner
2. NIMMY GEORGE, BDS STUDENT DO-DO-
3. UMMUHANI.K., BDS STUDENT DO-DO-
4. VARSHA.K.V. BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
5. BINU.B. KURUP, BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
6. MAHESH MOHAN, BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
7. MOHAMMED D. RASHID BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
8. SAFA AHMEAD BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
9. UMAIMA BINDH SALIH, BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
10. SOONAM SALMA, BDS STUDENT, DO-DO-
Vs
1. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY
... Respondent
2. THE REGISTRAR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY,
For Petitioner :SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE
For Respondent :SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :02/06/2010
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C) Nos. 25388/09 &
25989 OF 2009
-------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of JUNE, 2010
J U D G M E N T
These writ petitions relate to the entitlement of the
petitioners for appearing for the fourth year examination of the
BDS course. The issue involved in these writ petitions has been
extensively considered by a learned Single Judge of this Court
and interim orders have been passed which are identical in both
case. The order is quoted below:
Heard Sri.A.Mohammed Mustaque, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners and Sri.M.Sasindran, the
learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1
to 3. There was no representation for the fourth
respondent.2. The petitioners are students undergoing the
BDS Degree course in Century Dental College,
Kasaragod. They appeared for the second year BDS
Examination conducted by the Kannur University in
November, 2008. The third year classes commenced in
January, 2009. While the petitioners were attending
the third year classes, the result of the second year
BDS Examination held in November, 2008 was
published on 20.7.2009. The petitioners failed in more
than one subject. As per the Regulations for the BDS
Course, only a candidate who has passed all the second
year BDS subjects can be promoted to the third year of
the course.3. Apprehending that they will not be permitted
to continue their studies the petitioners moved the ViceW.P.(c)No.25388/09 & Con.case 2
Chancellor of Kannur University by submitting
Ext.P11 representation seeking permission to
continue to attend the third year classes. This writ
petition was thereafter filed on 7.9.2009 seeking a
direction to the respondents to permit the petitioners
to continue their studies in the third year of the BDS
course and to appear for the examination.
Meanwhile, a supplementary examination was also
conducted in August, 2009. The petitioners
registered and appeared for the said examination.
The results were published on 7.12.2009. The
petitioners passed the papers in which they had
failed in their maiden attempt. The petitioners
submit that in such circumstances as they have now
passed the second year BDS Examination and as
they have been attending classes regularly since
January, 2009, they may be permitted to appear for
the third year BDS Examination commencing on
17.12.2009. The petitioners contend that as they
were pursuing their studies in the third year, the
delay on the part of the University in publishing the
result of the second year examination conducted in
November, 2008 cannot be a reason to deny them
appearance in the third year examination especially
when they have passed the second year examination
in full though belatedly in the supplementary
examination.4. Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned standing
counsel appearing for the Kannur University submits
that the Regulations stipulate that a candidate
should have passed the second year examination in
full before he is promoted to the course of study for
the third year and that carry over is not permitted.
The petitioners who failed in the second year
examination could not have continued their studies
in the third year of the course, it is submitted. The
learned counsel submits that the mere fact that the
petitioners have passed the second year BDS
Examination in the second attempt is not a ground to
permit them to attend the third year classes or to
appear in the third year examination.5. I have considered the submissions made at
the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either
side. Regulation No.5 of the Regulations governing
the BDS course reads as follows:“The candidate should pass in all the
IInd BDS subjects before he is promoted to
the course of study for IIIrd BDS .”
W.P.(c)No.25388/09 & Con.case 3
If Regulation No.5 is strictly implemented, it would
mean that all the students who appeared for the
second year BDS examination held in November,
2008, would have sit out till 20.7.2009 when the
result of the said examination was published. Such a
situation is not contemplated by the Regulations. The
University took nearly eight months to publish the
results. If the regulations are to be strictly
implemented, the University should also be diligent
in conducting the examinations and in publishing the
results. It cannot therefore be said that the
petitioners should have waited till 20.7.2009 to be
told whether they can attend the third year classes.
The learned counsel appearing for the University was
not able to point out any provision in the University
Act, Statutes, Ordinances or Regulations which
stipulate that higher classes can commence only
after the results of the lower examination are
published. In such circumstances, the period of
study undergone by the petitioners in the third year
of the course after appearing in the second year
examination till 20.7.2009 when the result of the
second year examination was published cannot be
wiped out. Further, the petitioners state that they
continued to attend the classes thereafter also.
They also appeared for and passed the
supplementary examination held in August, 2009 the
result of which was published on 7.12.2009. In
other words, the petitioners have passed the second
year BDS Examination within five months from the
date on which the result of the examination held in
November, 2008 was published. In such
circumstances, in the interests of justice, I am of the
opinion that the petitioners should be permitted to
appear for the third year BDS Examination
commencing on 17.12.2009 if they have the required
attendance in the third year classes.
I accordingly direct the respondents to permit
the petitioners to appear for the third year BDS
Examination commencing on 17.12.2009 if they have
the required attendance. If the petitioners have the
required attendance, the respondents shall permit
them to appear for the examination and also make
necessary arrangements by issuing hall tickets and
by providing the requisite number of question paper
booklets and answer books.
Registry to hand over a copy of this order to
both sides on usual terms today itself”.
W.P.(c)No.25388/09 & Con.case 4
The writ petitions were finally heard by me. I am in full
agreement with the conclusions reached by the learned Single
Judge in the interim orders, which actually dispose of the writ
petitions themselves. Therefore, I dispose of these writ
petitions in terms of the above said interim order.
Consequently, there would be a direction to the University to
publish the results of the examination, which the petitioners
have written, as if the same has been written validly. Needless
to say, the mark lists etc., should also be issued to the
petitioners.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
acd
W.P.(c)No.25388/09 & Con.case 5
W.P.(c)No.25388/09 & Con.case 6