High Court Kerala High Court

Hareesh.G. vs The State Of Kerala on 4 December, 2007

Kerala High Court
Hareesh.G. vs The State Of Kerala on 4 December, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 35349 of 2007(G)


1. HAREESH.G., S/O.P.GOPINATHAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NABEEL.N., S/O.NAZAR.S, AGED 20 YEARS,
3. NISHAN.B., S/O.A.R.BASHEER,
4. NITHIN MANIKANTAN, S/O.G.MANIKANTAN,

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE

3. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,

4. THE PRINCIPAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.K.GIRIJA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :04/12/2007

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                    W.P.(C) No. 35349 OF 2007 G
                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                 Dated this the 4th December, 2007

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are Vth Semester B.Tech students in the 4th

respondent College. The writ petition has been filed praying for

directing the respondents to consider the petitioners’ request for

condoning shortage of attendance and pass orders. They are also

seeking a direction to the respondents to register their names for

the vi th Semester B.Tech course without insisting for the certificate

condoning shortage of their absence.

2. It is stated in the writ petition that going by the

percentage of attendance that has been declared by the University,

as against the minimum requirement of 75%, the percentage of

attendance that they have is 60, 64, 61 and 60 respectively. It is the

specific contention of the Petitioners that if the attendance as

indicated in Exts. P1, P4, P8 and P9 is also taken into account, they

will be satisfying the minimum requirement and will reach within the

WPC No. 35349/07
-2-

condonable limits.

3. The request made by them to give credit to the days

indicted in Exts P1, P4, P8 and P9 is yet to be considered by the

Principal. The Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that

it is essentially for the Principal of the college concerned to consider

the request made and make his recommendations to the Controller

of Examinations in the University and that it is thereafter for the

Controller of Examinations, to finally decide the matter.

4. Taking into account the facts of the case and the

submissions made as above, I dispose of this writ petition directing

that the 4th respondent shall take up Exts. P1, P4, P8 and P9

requests made by the petitioner for taking into account the number

of days indicated therein and make his recommendations to the

Controller of Examinations of the University. This the 4th

respondent shall do within 7 days of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Thereafter, on receipt of the recommendations from the

4th respondent, the 3rd respondent shall finally decide on the request

of the petitioners for condonation of their attendance. While doing

so, the 3rd respondent shall take into account the recommendations

WPC No. 35349/07
-3-

made by the 4th respondent also. This the 3rd respondent shall do

within 10 days of receipt of the recommendation of the Principal.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-