IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37249 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.A.SULFI, AGED 24 YEARS, KAKKATTUKUDIYIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.240, MARAMPILLY VILLAGE, PALLIPRAM KARA, P.O.MUDIKKAL, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR, NURSING COUNCIL, GOVT. OF KERALA, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGER, FATHIMA HOSPITAL, KASARKOD, P.O.KASARGOD. 3. DR.ZAKARIA MANAGING DIRECTOR, FATHIMA HOSPITAL KASARGOD, P.O.KASARKOD. ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC FOR R-1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 37249 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 25th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a student of General Nursing in the Nursing School run by the 2nd respondent during the year 2003-06. According to the petitioner, on account of the malafides of the 3rd respondent, petitioner was deliberately denied benefit of moderation, as a result of which, she could not pass the examination. It is with this allegation, the writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the respondents to revalue the answer sheets of the supplementary examination in which the petitioner appeared, give her the benefit of moderation and to declare the results on that basis. 2. Having regard to the allegations in the writ petition, this Court directed the standing counsel for the 1st respondent to obtain instructions in the matter. Accordingly, learned standing counsel has obtained instructions. It is submitted that in the first and second year examinations, petitioner passed and that in the third year examination, petitioner failed in the practical test for the subject Midwifery. It is stated that the petitioner appeared in WPC No.37249/10 :2 : the supplementary examination under the old scheme on 5 occasions and that the petitioner did not pass in anyone of the examination. It is stated that, in 2008, the last examination under the old scheme was held, and considering the fact that, that was the last chance available to students like the petitioner, the 1st respondent recommended moderation of 14 marks. It is stated that, though the petitioner appeared for the examination, even if moderation was given, she would have got only 29 marks as against the minimum required 38 marks. It is stated that, on that occasion, the answer paper was revalued on her application, that did not improve the situation. Counsel submits that petitioner also made an application under the Right to Information Act and that in pursuance thereof, answer papers were made available to the petitioner and the verification conducted then also did not help her to pass the examination. 3. It is submitted that pursuant to the representations made, in June, 2010, 1st respondent again issued notice to the petitioner in order to give her an opportunity to appear once again under the old scheme and there was no response from the petitioner. It is stated that, even in January, 2011 notice was WPC No.37249/10 :3 : issued giving the petitioner yet another opportunity, which also was not availed of. It is submitted that inspite of all the above, 1st respondent has decided that if the petitioner wants, petitioner can be given yet another chance to appear for the examination under the old scheme. It is submitted that it will be open to the petitioner to appear before the 1st respondent on 27/1/2011 and get a date convenient to both parties fixed for conducting the examination. 4. In the light of the submissions thus made, I cannot find fault with the respondents for the situation in which the petitioner is now placed. The only option available to the petitioner is to appear before the 1st respondent as offered before this Court and get a date suitable to the petitioner and the 1st respondent and thereupon the 1st respondent will conduct the examination under the old scheme so that the petitioner can appear in the said examination and if she pass the examination can obtain certificates. With that liberty, writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp