IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36733 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- GOVIND VISHNU.A., B-TECH BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BICHEMICAL ENGINEERING STUDENT, SREE CHITRA THIRUNAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018 RESIDING AT KOVILAKAM, CHAVARA.P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034. 2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034. 3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034. 4. THE SENATE, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN(VICE-CHANCELLOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, SREE CHITRA THIRUNAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 36733 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 10th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a student of Biotechnology and Biochemical Engineering course (B.Tech) at the Sree Chitra Thirunal College of Engineering, Thiruvananthapuram. While he was undergoing course in the 7th semester, on the basis that he had shortage of attendance, he was not permitted to register for the 7th Semester examination. At that stage, he approached this Court by filing WP (C) No.31135/09, in which, this Court passed Ext.P2 interim order. In that interim order, the respondents were directed to permit the petitioner to appear for the examination purely on a provisional basis subject to further orders and clarifying that the petitioner's appearance will be purely provisional and that his results need not be published unless otherwise ordered by this Court. It was further directed that, if ultimately this Court upholds that the petitioner was not entitled to apply for condonation of shortage of attendance, the appearance in the examination shall stand cancelled. 2. Subsequently, Ext.P3 interim order was passed WPC No. 36733/10 :2 : enabling the petitioner to attend the 8th semester classes and by Ext.P4, he was again provisionally permitted to appear for the 8th semester examination. Subsequently, by Ext.P7 order, Vice Chancellor rejected the application of the petitioner for condonation of attendance shortage on the ground that the candidate had already availed condonation twice during the course. Still later, writ petition was finally heard and by Ext.P8 judgment, this Court upheld Ext.P7 order and dismissed the writ petition. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 representation requesting the Vice Chancellor to publish the 7th and 8th semester results, which are withheld. That request of the petitioner has been rejected by Ext.P10 order. It is challenging Ext.P10 and praying for a direction to the university to publish the results, the writ petition is filed. 4. First of all, the appearance of the petitioner in the 7th semester examination, 8th semester classes and 8th semester examination were based on the interim orders passed by this Court. These were purely provisional and subject to the final decision on the request of the petitioner for condonation of his WPC No. 36733/10 :3 : attendance. That request of the petitioner has been rejected by Ext.P7 order, which was upheld by this Court in Ext.P8 judgment. That judgment has become final. Therefore, anything done based on the interim orders passed by this Court, which was purely provisional, have merged in the judgment, and therefore, in view of the judgment dismissing the writ petition, the University cannot be compelled to declare the results of the petitioner for the 7th and 8th semesters. 5. It is now submitted that in terms of the University Statutes, a candidate like the petitioner will have to apply for a fresh registration after attending classes and thus making up the shortage of attendance, necessarily, that is the only course open to the petitioner. Writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp