IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 5995 of 2007(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CIYA PAULOSE, W/O.ALEX, RESIDING AT PALATHINGAL HOUSE, PERUMBILLY P.O., MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY FOR RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 5995/2007 -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF MARK LIST DT. 1-4-2004. EXT.P1(a) DO. DT. 6-4-2005. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF B.TECH DEGREE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION. EXT.P4 LETTER DT. 2-9-2005. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 5995 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 27th May, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a student of B. Tech. Degree examination. In one paper, she failed and she appeared for the supplementary examination four times. For the third time, she submitted an application for revaluation of the answer paper. Since the revaluation result was not published prior to the next examination, she appeared for the fourth time and passed. She secured 4668 marks out of 7800 for all the semesters. She was placed in the second class. Subsequently, revaluation results for the supplementary examination for the third time was published and adding eleven marks, her aggregate marks became 4679 out of 7800. This comes to 59.98%. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the University to round off the same so as to enable the petitioner to secure First Class. 2. I have heard the counsel. 3. In the absence of any rules or regulations regarding such a procedure, I do not think that the University can be directed to round off the marks secured by the petitioner by calculating the percentage and rounding off the fraction. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/