High Court Kerala High Court

The University Of Calicut vs Mary P.L. on 8 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
The University Of Calicut vs Mary P.L. on 8 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1168 of 2009()


1. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,
3. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,

                        Vs



1. MARY P.L., ARACKAL HOUSE, CHELOOR P.O.,
                       ...       Respondent

2. RABISHA.P.O., KARUKAYIL HOUSE,

3. SARANYA K.B., RAMANKULATH HOUSE,

4. SRUTHY KRISHNA, KADAVILPARAMBIL HOUSE,

5. VIDHU K.T., VAZHAPPALLY HOUSE,

6. FABITHA P.S., CHANDANAPARAMBIL HOUSE,

7. JAYASREE.P.K., KEYATH HOUSE, KODALY,

8. PRINCY K.S., KARAYIL HOUSE, PADIYOOR,

9. SONA P.S., PINDARAMKULATH HOUSE,

10. ABITHA K.T., KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE,

11. AMRITH R., KALARICKAL HOUSE, MINALLUR.

12. ASHLY M.S, ETTATH HOUSE, PEINJANAM,

13. DEEPAK P.S., PULIYATH HOUSE,

14. DIVYA C.U., MURUKKUMATHARA HOUSE,

15. DIVYA RAJ.K., KAIPATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE,

16. DIVYA V.P., VETTUTHARA HOUSE,

17. LEKHA K.., KRISHNANKUTTY, KURUVATH HOUSE

18. REEGA N.R., NHATTUKETTY HOUSE,

19. SANEESH K.S., KOKKANTHARA HOUSE,

20. SARIKA K.S., CHULIPARAMBIL HOUSE,

21. SELVA M.A., PALLIPARAMBU HOUSE,

22. SUDIN.K.S, KANNAMKULAM HOUSE,

23. SUMANJU K., KIZHAKKEDATH HOUSE,

24. SUMEESH K.S., KOOTTALA HOUSE,

25. AMBISHA K.T., KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE,

26. ARCHANA A.A., ANAKOTTU HOUSE,

27. ASHA RAMANUNNI K., KARUVANJERI HOUSE,

28. CHANDRIKA P.C., MANNANTHARA HOUSE,

29. GEETHA NARAYANAN NAIR, PAREKKATTU HOUSE,

30. GEETH M.R., THARAKKATTIL HOUSE,

31. GINSHA E.G., PETTIKKATTIL HOUSE,

32. HAZEENA M.K., THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE,

33. JAYASRI.N.A., PERINGALAYIL HOUSE,

34. KAVITHA K., KARAYAMVATTATH HOUSE,

35. LEENA T.S., POLASSERY HOUSE,

36. NIMMI, PANACKAL HOUSE, NATTIKA,

37. REMYA V.G., VAKKAYIL HOUSE, ALOOR,

38. SANU M.R., MARASSERY HOUSE,

39. SMITHAMOL N.J., THAMPURATTIPARAMBIL

40. SOUMYA K.S., KOLLARA HOUSE,

41. THANSEERA P.N., PALATHINGAL HOUSE,

42. VIJAYASREE K.V., KOLAMTHARA HOUSE,

43. DIVYA A.U., ANAKKOTTU HOUSE,

44. DIVYA T.D., THATTIL HOUSE, KAVALAM.

45. KSHEMO K.C., KOTTIYATTIL HOUSE,

46. REMYA A.P., PULIYATH HOUSE,

47. RITTY JOSE, MEKKATTUKULAM HOUSE,

48. SALINI.K.S., AINIPULLI HOUSE,

49. SANDHYA K.S., KOOTTALAM HOUSE,

50. SISSY K.V., PANTHALLUKKARAN HOUSE,

51. SUBITHA V.S., CHELLELY HOUSE,

52. HYMA P.D., PULIPARAMBIL HOUSE,

53. NISHANTHI P.S., PERINGATHARA HOUSE,

54. OGUS CHEEKU K., KOLANGARA HOUSE,

55. PRAVITHA V.S., VALLIYIL HOUSE,

56. SALMATH V.V., VALIYAVALAPPIL HOUSE,

57. SHIJI T.R., THEPARAMBIL HOUSE,

58. SHYNI T.P., ORUPARAMBIL HOUSE,

59. SIMY K.MADHAVAN, KALARICKAL HOUSE,

60. SUMA T.P., KOCHATHU HOUSE,

61. K.B.VIJAYALEKSHMI, KALARICKAL HOUSE,

62. VIJAYASREE A., ATHAMKAVIL HOUSE,

63. VIKRAM SARABHAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST AND

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY.

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

 Dated :08/06/2009

 O R D E R

S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. &
KURIAN JOSEPH,J.

————————————————-

W.A.No.1168 of 2009

————————————————–
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2009

JUDGMENT

Kurian Joseph,J.

After having heard learned counsel appearing for

the appellants and also learned counsel appearing for the

respondents, we find that the main apprehension of the

University is on the precedent that is likely to be created by

the impugned judgment and also on some of the

observations contained in the judgment. We make it clear

that the judgment only relates to the peculiar facts of the

instant case and it will not be taken as a precedent. As far

as the writ petitioners are concerned, we are informed that

the students have been permitted to appear for the

examinations pursuant to the interim orders passed by this

court and certificates also have been issued. Therefore, we

leave open the contentions taken by the parties in the writ

W.A.No.1168 of 2009
: 2 :

petition and the writ appeal is disposed of as above making

it clear that the writ petitioners shall be treated to have

been duly admitted to the course.

S.R.BANNURMATH,
Chief Justice

KURIAN JOSEPH,
Judge

ahg.

S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. &
KURIAN JOSEPH,J.

—————————
W.A.No.1168 of 2009

—————————-

JUDGMENT

8th June, 2009