High Court Kerala High Court

Vaisakh C.Mohan vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 15 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Vaisakh C.Mohan vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 15 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17953 of 2010(T)


1. VAISAKH C.MOHAN, PAZHANGATTU HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NIKHIL V,THOMAS PAUL, VALIYAPARAMBIL

                        Vs



1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,

3. UNION CHRISTIOAN COLLEGE,REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.JAYASANKAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.SAJI VARGHESE

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :15/06/2010

 O R D E R
                      S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 W.P.(C)No. 17953 of 2010
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010

                        J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are 2nd semester B.Sc students of the

3rd respondent college. They were not permitted to appear

for the 2nd semester examination for alleged shortage of

attendance. According to the petitioners, they were not

intimated in time about the shortage of attendance and

therefore they could not apply for condonation of shortage.

Later on, when they contacted the authorities they came to

understand that in fact there was no shortage of attendance

as alleged. The examinations are over. They could not

write the examination for the 2nd semester. As per the rules

of the University, only a student who passes the

2nd semester examination can write the 3rd semester

examination. Petitioners now want to write the 3rd semester

examination. Petitioners contend that in order to write the

2nd semester examination again it is necessary to get orders

W.P.(C)No. 17953 of 2010
-2-

regarding condonation of shortage of attendance for which

the petitioners filed Exts.P3 & P4 before the 2nd respondent.

The petitioners seek a direction to the 2nd respondent to

consider and pass orders on Exts.P3 & P4 expeditiously and

to direct the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioners to

attend 3rd semester classes in the meanwhile.

2. The standing counsel for the University opposes

the same. He also points out that, the authority to consider

the request for condonation of shortage of attendance is the

Vice Chancellor.

3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this

writ petition with the following directions:

The 2nd respondent shall place Exts.P3 & P4

applications of the petitioners before the Vice

Chancellor of the University for his consideration

and disposal. The Vice Chancellor shall consider

and pass orders on Exts.P3 & P4 as expeditiously

as possible, at any rate within a period of one

W.P.(C)No. 17953 of 2010
-3-

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Pending consideration of Exts.P3 & P4

by the Vice Chancellor the petitioners shall be

permitted to attend classes for the 3rd semester.

However if ultimately they do not succeed their

attempt to get the shortage of attendance

condoned, they will not be eligible for any

concession in equity in respect of the period

during which they attended 3rd semester classes

and they will have to sit for the 2nd semester to

complete the full course and then attend the

3rd semester classes.

S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE

shg/