IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2009 / 31ST BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26544 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MUHAMMED SABIN.K.P,S/O.K.S.PAREED, KANJIRAKKOTTIL HOUSE,PERINGALA.PO, ERNAKULAM-683 565. 2. NIHANT.K.S,S/O.SIVAN.K.R,KOTTILAPPILLY HOUSE,CHERUVYPPU,AYYAMPILLY.PO,ERNAKULAM-682 501. 3. JINO PAUL,S/O.PAUL.P.V,PANICHIKUDY HOUSE KUTHUKUZHY.P.O,KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM-686691. 4. FIDHA HUSSAIN,S/O.HUSSAIN.C.M, CHOORAVELIL HOUSE,VENGALLOR.PO, THODUPUZHA-685 584. 5. SHYJU.R,S/O.RAMANAN.B,SHYNI NIVAS, MANAPPALLY.P.O,KOLLAM-690 574. 6. MUHAMMED NISHAD.K,S/O.MUHAMMED.K, KULATHINGAL HOUSE,PULAMANTHOLE.PO, MALAPPURAM-679 323. BY ADV. SMT.RESHMI JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,KOTTAYAM. SRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 26544 of 2009 K ````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Smt.Reshmi Jacob, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University. 2. The petitioners appeared for the seventh semester B.Tech degree examination in Electrical and Electronics Engineering in the year 2008. They failed in the paper on Electrical Drawing. They, therefore, appeared for the supplementary examination held in May 2009. Simultaneously, they also appeared for the eighth semester examination held in May-June 2009. The results of the seventh and eighth semester examinations were published in August 2009. The petitioners passed all the papers of the eighth semester. They, however, again failed in the paper on Electrical Drawing for which they had appeared in the supplementary seventh semester examination conducted in May 2009. The petitioners have, therefore, applied for revaluation of their answer scripts in Electrical Drawing by submitting the originals of Exts.P7 to P12 applications. They have also paid the requisite fee. The petitioners submit that they have done well in the supplementary examination and WPC.26544/09 : 2 : that if their answer scripts are revalued, they are sure to secure a pass in the examination. They submit that as they have completed their studies and have also passed the other semester examinations including the eighth semester, it will cause serious prejudice to them, if their answer scripts in Electrical Drawing are not expeditiously revalued. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to revalue the answer scripts described in Exts.P7 to P12 applications expeditiously and within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 3. Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University submits that petitioners' applications cannot be singled out and revalued as it will lead to loss of confidentiality. He also submits that as per the Examination Manual, the University requires 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. He further submits that the petitioners' applications for revaluation will be considered and their answer scripts revalued, if their applications are in order, within the aforesaid period. 4. The Examination Manual is not a statutory regulation. It is a Manual prepared by the University for its guidance. The stipulations WPC.26544/09 : 3 : in the Examination Manual cannot, in my opinion, operate to the detriment of students. A Division Bench of this Court has in University of Kerala Vs. Sandhya P. Pai [1991 (1) KLT 812] held that the University should hurry with applications for revaluation without wasting any time and that unless applications for revaluation are expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that University should not wait for the expiry of 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the revaluation of the answer scripts described in Exts.P7 to P12 and to communicate the result to the petitioners, within six weeks from the date on which the petitioners produce a certified copy of this judgment before the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University. Sd/- (P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. to Judge