IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13414 of 2009(V)
1. MURALI .V,
... Petitioner
2. SUMESH.K
3. SREEJITH C.K.,
4. RENJITH R CHANDRAN,
Vs
1. KANNUR UNIVERSITY,
... Respondent
2. VICE CHANCELLOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
For Respondent :SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :22/05/2009
O R D E R
V.GIRI, J
---------------------------
W.P.(C).13414 of 2009
---------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009
JUDGMENT
Heard Mr.Kaleeswaram Raj, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.M.Sasindran, learned standing
counsel for the Kannur University.
2. The petitioners, who are diploma holders in
different faculties of Engineering, are prosecuting part-
time B.Tech course in the Government College of
Engineering, Kannur. They attend classes in the evening.
According to them, the prospectus for admission to the
part-time B.Tech Course would show that only diploma
holders in the corresponding and related trade are
entitled for admission to the course. This they say, is the
same as that prescribed for the regular B.Tech course
students, who seek lateral entry to the said course. Such
students who are given lateral entry to regular B.Tech
course are exempted from appearing for the 1st and 2nd
semester examinations. Essentially, the petitioners claim
W.P.(C).13414 of 2009
:: 2 ::
a parity of treatment and for this purpose, they have
submitted Ext.P4 which though addressed to the Vice
Chancellor, would property require the attention of the
Syndicate, as exemption from appearing for the 1st and
2nd semester examinations would require an
amendment of the regulations. This can be done only
by the Syndicate. The Vice Chancellor could exercise
powers only if the Syndicate is unable to meet or the
matter is such that the delay in the meeting of the
Syndicate cannot be brooked.
3. Having gone through the averments in the
writ petition and having heard counsel on both sides, I
am of the opinion that the request made in Ext.P4
merits consideration by the University.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the competent authority of the 1st respondent
to consider the request made by the petitioners in
Ext.P4 and take a decision as expeditiously as possible.
It will be open to the petitioners to approach the
W.P.(C).13414 of 2009
:: 3 ::
University officials for taking appropriate action in the
matter of taking part in the examinations or exemption
therefrom. Delay in taking decision on Ext.P4 should
not prejudice the petitioners from prosecuting their
studies in the college.
Sd/-
(V.GIRI)
Judge
sk/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge