IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 23293 of 2010(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SANDRA K.SABU, D/O.SABU K.S., AGED 20 YEARS, 3RD YEAR BDS STUDENT, ST.GREGORIOS DENTAL COLLEGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN, SRI.M.SAJJAD. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM-686 560. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYASARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM-686 560. 3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, ST.GREGARIOUS DENTAL COLLEGE, KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691. R1 TO R3 BY SRI. T.A. SHAJI, S.C, M.G.UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------- W.P.(C) No. 23293 OF 2010 --------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Petitioner is a BDS student of St.Gregorios Dental College, Kothamangalam. According to the petitioner, in the 1st year examination she failed in two subjects out of three. As a result of which, she could not continue her course in the 2nd year. On revaluation, though she passed in the examination, on account of the break in the 2nd year course, she was not permitted to appear for the examination. At that stage, she approached this Court and filed W.P.(C) No.36914/2009 and pursuant to the interim orders passed, she appeared for the examination as well. However, her lack of attendance in the 2nd year course, caused on account of the break, which occurred in the aforesaid circumstances, was not condoned. Taking note of the said grievance, W.P.(C) No.36914/2010 was disposed of by Ext.P9 judgment directing that the petitioner to move the Academic Council and the Academic Council was ordered to take a decision on the request of the petitioner in the light of W.P.(C) No.23293/2010 2 observations made therein. Petitioner accordingly submitted Ext.P10 representation before the Academic Council. Since there was delay in passing orders on Ext.P10 she also moved Ext.P11 representation before the Vice Chancellor, Mahatma Gandhi University, invoking his power under Section 10(17) of the M.G. University Act. Even on Ext.P11, there was no decision and therefore the Writ Petition is filed. 2. Although the University has filed a statement in this case contesting the claim of the Petitioner, having regard to the fact that Ex.P9 judgment has become final, the Academic Council necessarily has to take a decision on the request of the petitioner, duly taking note of the observations made by this Court. In that view of the matter, I dispose of the Writ Petition directing that if the Academic Council or the Vice Chancellor have not taken any decision on Exts.P10 or P11, either of the authorities shall consider the representations made by the petitioner, at any rate, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On the other hand, if a decision on the claim of the petitioner has already been taken by W.P.(C) No.23293/2010 3 the Academic Council, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith on the production of a copy of this judgment. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) ps/2/09