IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1932 WA.No. 1882 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.8553/2010 Dated 08/09/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ------------------------------- 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 3&4: --------------------------------------------- 1. MANJUSHA JOSE, AGED 22 YEARS, D/O.JOSE K.A., KAITHARATH HOUSE, KOMBARA WEST, IRINJALAKUDA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SIMSIE KATHARIN, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.T.P.VARGHESE, THEKKUDEN HOUSE, ARIVENNUR P.O., POTHENKODE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. FATHIMATH SUHARA, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.KUNJABDULLAH, PERUVANNOOR HOUSE, KALATHI P.O., KOZHIKODE. 4. MAR BASELIOS DENTAL COLLEGE, THANKALAM, KOTHAMANGALAM-686691. 5. THE DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA, AIWAAN-E, GALIB MARG, KOTLA ROAD, TEMPLE LANE, NEW DELHI-110002, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 TO R4 BY ADV.M. JITHESH MENON R5 BY ADV. SRI. SAJEEV KUMAR K GOPAL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W. A. No. 1882 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed by the M. G. University challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge who upheld the respondents' right to continue study in the fourth year of the B.D.S. course and to write the examination. Respondents initially failed in two subjects in the third year examination disentitling them to continue study in the fourth year of the course. However, since respondents applied for revaluation of answer books, the Principal permitted them to continue in the fourth year course. Respondents had also filed Writ Petition wherein this Court issued interim orders permitting them to continue and to write supplementary examination. Subsequently, on revaluation respondents 1 and 3 passed in both the subjects and second respondent passed in one subject which means that if revaluation was the original result, respondents would have been allowed to continue their study in the fourth year of the B.D.S. course. Further, the learned single Judge WA 1882/2010 2 found that in the supplementary examination, respondents cleared all the papers in the third year. Even though we find force in the contention of standing counsel for the University that regulations do not permit students who failed in two subjects or more in the third years to continue their study in the fourth year, we do not think respondents can be denied the benefit in this case because in revaluation respondents 1 and 3 passed in both the subjects while the second respondent passed in one subject and consequent upon revaluation, there is no disability for the respondents to continue their study in the fourth year of the course. We therefore do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned single Judge. Consequently Writ Appeal is dismissed. If appellants do not publish the result, respondents are free to move this Court for contempt. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (BHABANI PRASAD RAY) Judge. WA 1882/2010 3 kk