IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1384 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.14669/2008 Dated 29/05/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ----------------------------------- POORNIMA HARI, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O.HARI, PLAMOOTIL HOUSE, VANDANPATHATHAL.P.O, (R.P.C. P.O), MUNDAKAYAM-686513. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN VIPIN SRI.DENY JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ----------------------------------------------- 1. M.R.UNNI, AGED 49 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686560. 2. DR.M.THOMAS JOHN, AGED 49 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, EXAMINATION CONTROLLER, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS.PO, KOTTAYAM-686 560. 3. JAYADHARAN, AGED 53 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, JOINT REGISTRAR I (EXAM), MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686560. SRI. T.A. SHAJI -SC THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ Contempt Case (C)No.1384 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court complaining of non-compliance with Annexure-A judgment, in which I directed the University to complete the revaluation process for which the petitioner has applied for. 2. Now the learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that the revaluation could not be done, since in spite of the lest efforts of the University, the answer papers could not be traced. The learned Standing Counsel submits that in view of the said circumstance, the petitioner, along with two other similarly situated students were given an opportunity to write the examination conducted for them on 20.9.2008 without payment of any examination fees. Although the other two students availed of the opportunity and wrote the examination, the petitioner did not write the examination. Still the University is prepared to afford another opportunity to the petitioner to write the next examination in accordance with the same syllabus in C.O.C.No.1384/2008 2 which he wrote his earlier examination, for the petitioner without payment of any examination fees within a period of two months. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I close this contempt case recording the above undertaking of the University. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd C.O.C.No.1384/2008 3