IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 21672 of 2007(E)
1. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE,S/O.KURIAKOSE K.A.
... Petitioner
2. VARGHESE MATHEW, S/O. I.M.MATHEW,
3. SANEESH KUNJUKUNJU, S/O. M.D.PETER,
4. REJANISH K.V., S/O. K.B.VENUGOPALAN,
5. GOPAKUMAR N.M., S/O. MOHANAN N.C.,
6. SABITHA B.MATHEW, D/O. BABY M.MATHEW,
7. RUJITHA T.R., AGED 23 YEARS,
8. INDU P.RAJ, D/O. R.DEVARAJAN,
9. VIDHYA A.KRISHNAN, D/O. T.S.KRISHNAN,
10. SREELATHA P.V., D/O. P.K.VASUDEVAN,
Vs
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
... Respondent
2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,
3. THE PRINCIPAL,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.SANJAY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :31/07/2007
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN,J
================
W.P.(C).No.21672 of 2007
======================
Dated this the 31st day of July 2007
JUDGMENT
Petitioners are students of the 4th semester LLB three year
course of the Government Law College, Ernakulam. Their 4th
semester examination was scheduled to be conducted on
24.11.2006. The petitioners alleges that since they were
prevented from writing the examination by other students they
could not write that examination on that day. None of the
students of the college wrote the examination also. Although the
petitioners expected that the examination would be rescheduled,
the University took a stand that no reexamination would be
conducted. In the above circumstances petitioners approached
this Court with this writ petition seeking a direction to the
University to permit the petitioners to write the examination
along with the 8th semester students of the five year course since
both examinations are identical. When it was pointed out that
the schemes of the two examinations are different and students
of one scheme cannot be allowed write examination of the other
W.P.(C).No.21672/2007
:2:
scheme, the petitioners sought a direction to the University to
conduct a supplementary examination. The learned standing
counsel for the University submits that since in semester systems
no supplementary examination are being conducted and
petitioners have to write the next regular examination which
would be conducted as far as possible within another two
months. This is recorded and the writ petition is closed.
S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
dvs