IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5840 of 2011(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ NIMESH BABU, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. BABU.P.G., POTTAKKAL HOUSE, KUTTIYANCHAL, KOOVAPPARA.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.ELDHO PAUL, SMT.TESSY JOSE. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------------- 1. THE MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM - 685 001. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF EVALUATION, M.G.UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM - 685 001. 3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, M.G.UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM - 685 001. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI. T.A.SHAJI, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.5840 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:- i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus, any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent 1 to 3 to issue hall ticket to the petitioner to appear for the 1st semester MBA examination scheduled to be commenced on 25-02-2011. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear for the 1st semester MBA Examination. iii) To issue such other writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only reason pointed out from the part of the University, for not permitting the petitioner to appear for the 1st semester MBA examination is that the petitioner did not produce the mark sheets of the qualifying examinations on or before 13-10-2010. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner may not be blamed in this regard, for the reason that the result of the W.P.(C) No. 5840/2011 - 2 - supplementary examination was published by the University only in December 2010 and hence that, he might be permitted to participate in the examination on a 'provisional basis', subject to the result of the Writ Petition. 3. The learned standing counsel for the University submits that, a similar case had come up for consideration before another learned Judge of this Court earlier and as per judgment dated 29-07-2008 in W.P.(C) No. 11035/2008, the position of law was answered against the petitioner, holding that since the petitioner could not have been declared as passed on the last day specified by the University for getting admission to the higher education course, no positive relief could be extended, and as such, no permission could be given to the petitioner to appear for the examination. It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned standing counsel that, subsequently, in another case, observing whether the Vice Chancellor of the University could provide some helping hand in such cases, the matter was referred to the Division Bench of this Court. 4. After considering the issue, the Division Bench, as per judgment dated 14-09-2009 in W.P.(C) affirmed the law declared W.P.(C) No. 5840/2011 - 3 - in the former case, holding that no such benefit can be extended in any circumstance. It is also stated that the aggrieved party took up the matter before the Apex Court, where interference was declined. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, the matter does not warrant any interference. The Writ Petition is devoid of any merit. It is dismissed accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vdv