IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14542 of 2010(P)
1. JAYARESMI T.N., AGED 27 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINTIONS,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS
For Respondent :SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :13/09/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C.) No.14542 of 2010 (P)
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 13th day of September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner was a M.Sc Mathematics student during the
academic year 2003-05. According to her, she is having an
aggregate of 63% marks. But she filed for one mark in the subject
Differential Geometry. It is stated that originally she appeared for
the subject in 2004 and secured 19 marks, which after revaluation
was became 29. It is stated that she made three more attempts and
its results and revaluation results were against her. Finally she
appeared for the subject in January, 2009, the marks of which after
revaluation became 39.
2. The first prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to
conduct a further revaluation of the answer paper. Even according
to the petitioner, there is no Regulation providing for such
revaluation of papers which are already revalued. It is the settled
position of law that in the absence of any provision in the
Regulation for a further revaluation, this Court cannot pass such an
order. In this case, in the absence of any provision for a further
revaluation, this Court will not be justified in passing an order as
sought for by the petitioner.
WP(C) No.14542/2010
-2-
3. In so far as the second prayer for moderation marks is
concerned, in the statement filed by the University, their case is that
the petitioner is not eligible for moderation marks as she did not
pass the subject during the year 2004, the first time she appeared
for the subject in question. There is absolutely no material in this
writ petition to suggest that the stand taken by the University is
incorrect. If that be so, the petitioner cannot seek for a direction for
award of any moderation marks.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits though as per the
Regulations, January 2009 examination was the last chance available
to the petitioner, there has been instances when the University has
allowed students to appear again for the examination. On this
basis, learned counsel submits that the petitioner shall be given
another chance to appear for the examination. In so far as this
prayer is concerned, this is not an issue covered by pleadings in the
writ petition. Therefore, if at all, the petitioner has such a claim, I
leave it open to the petitioner to pursue the matter before the
University, in which event it is for the University to decide on the
request of the petitioner.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg