IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36669 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RASNEENA V.K., FINAL YEAR BDS STUDENT, CENTURY DENTAL COLLEGE, POINACHI, P.O.THEKKIL, KASARAGOD DT. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.T.PRAVEEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, MANGATTUPARAMBA, KANNUR, KANNUR DT. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, MANGATTUPARAMBA, KANNUR, KANNUR DT. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, CENTURY DENTAL COLLEGE, POINACHI, P.O.THEKKIL, KASARAGOD DT. ADV. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 36669/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE MARKLIST OF 3RD YEAR. P2. COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF SUPPLEMENTARY EXAM. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P.(C).No. 25989/2009 OF THIS COURT. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 36669 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner joined the BDS course in the year 2005. The petitioner appeared for the 3rd year examination of BDS course conducted by the Kannur University in November 2008. There was considerable delay in publication of the results of the 3rd year examination. Final year classes commenced in January, 2009 onwards. Although for promotion to the fourth year the candidates should have passed all except one paper of the third year examination, since the results of the examination were not published all students of the third year continued to attend the classes for the final year. When the results were published on 22.6.2009, the petitioner failed in all the three papers. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for the supplementary examination held during July, 2009. The results of the supplementary examination were published on 28.11.2009 and the petitioner cleared all papers. The University scheduled Part I examination of final year BDS on 31.2.2009. But the University directed the principal not the forward the application of the petitioner unless the same is accompanied by a court order as the petitioner is not legally entitled to carry over in view of the University regulations, since originally the petitioner failed in all papers of the third year w.p.c.36669/09 2 examination. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief; “issue a writ of mandamus or such other Writ or order directing 1st and 2nd respondents to accept the application for Part I examination in final year BDS Course and also to permit petitioner to appear for Part I Examination. 2. This Court passed an interim order on 18.12.2009 in this writ petition, following an interim order in another writ petition viz., W.P.(C).No. 25989/2009 filed by other students similarly placed, which reads thus; “Admit. Sri.M.Sasindarn, the learned standing counsel takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Issue notice to the third respondent by speed post returnable in 10 days. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the Kannur University on the question of grant of interim relief. 3. The petitioner herein is similarly placed as the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.25989 of 2009. I have by Ext.P3 interim order passed the said writ petition directed the respondents to provisionally permit the petitioners in the said writ petition to appear for the fourth year BDS Part I Examination commencing on 17.12.2009, if they have the required attendance. The petitioner states that the said examination has been postponed to 31.12.209. In such circumstances, if as stated by the petitioner, the fourth year BDS Part I Examination has been postponed from 17.12.2009 to 31.12.2009, the respondents shall extent (sic) the benefit of Ext.P3 interim order to the petitioner herein and all other students who are similarly placed, without insisting that they should move this Court seeking similar interim orders.” 3. I have heard the parties. 4. The interim order passed in W.P.(C).No.25989/2009 is produced as Ext.P3 in this writ petition. The same reads thus: 'Heard Sri.R.Anilkumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. There is no appearance for the third respondent. 2. The petitioners are students undergoing the BDS Degree course w.p.c.36669/09 3 in Century Dental College, Kasaragod. They appeared for the third year BDS Examination conducted by the Kannur University in November, 2008. The fourth year classes commenced in January, 2009. While the petitioners were attending the fourth year classes, the result of the third year BDS Examination held in November, 2008 was published on 13.7.2009. The first petitioner failed in three papers and the other petitioners failed in four papers of the third year BDS Examination. As per the Regulations for the BDS Course, only a candidate who has passed all the third year BDS subjects can be promoted to the course of study for final BDS Part I. However, a candidate who has failed only in one paper can be promoted. 3. Apprehending that they will not be permitted to continue their studies the petitioners moved the Vice Chancellor of Kannur University by submitting Ext.P2 representation seeking permission to continue to attend the fourth year classes. This writ petition was thereafter filed on 14.9.2009 seeking a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue their studies in the fourth year of the BDS course and to appear for the examination. Meanwhile, a supplementary examination was also conducted in September, 2009. The petitioners registered and appeared for the said examination. The results were published on 28.11.2009. The petitioners passed the papers in which they had failed in their maiden attempt. The petitioners submit that in such circumstances as they have now passed the third year BDS Examination and as they have been attending classes regularly since January, 2009, they may be permitted to appear for the fourth year BDS Part I Examination commencing on 17.12.2009. The petitioners contend that as they were pursuing their studies in the fourth year, the delay on the part of the University in publishing the result of the third year examination conducted in November, 2008 cannot be a reason to deny them appearance in the fourth year examination especially when they have passed the third year examination in full though belatedly in the supplementary examination. 4. Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Kannur University submits that the Regulations stipulate that a candidate should have passed the third year examination in full before he is promoted to the course of study for the final year and that carry over is permitted if the candidate has failed in one subject only. The petitioners who failed in three and more papers could not have continued their studies in the fourth year of the course, it is submitted. The learned counsel submits that the mere fact that the petitioners have passed the third year BDS Examination in the second attempt is not a ground to permit them to attend the fourth year classes or appear in the fourth year examination. 5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. Regulation No.6 of the Regulations governing the BDS course reads as follows: “6. The candidate should pass in all the IIIrd BDS subjects w.p.c.36669/09 4 before he is promoted to the course of study for final BDS Part I (Carry over is given if the candidate fails in one subject only).” If Regulation No.6 is strictly implemented, it would mean that all the students who appeared for the third year BDS examination held in November, 2008, would have sit out till 13.7.2009 when the result of the said examination was published. Such a situation is not contemplated by the Regulations. The University took nearly eight months to publish the results. If the regulations are to be strictly implemented, the University should also be diligent in conducting the examinations and in publishing the results. It cannot therefore be said that the petitioners should have waited till 13.7.2009 to be told whether they can attend the fourth year classes. The learned counsel appearing for the University was not able to point out any provision in the University Act, Statutes, Ordinances or Regulations which stipulate that higher classes can commence only after the results of the lower examination are published. In such circumstances, the period of study undergone by the petitioners in the fourth year of the course after appearing in the third year examination till 13.7.2009 when the result of the third year examination was published cannot be wiped out. Further, the petitioners state that they continued to attend the classes thereafter also. They also appeared for and passed the supplementary examination held in September, 2009 the result of which was published on 28.11.2009. In other words, the petitioners have passed the third year BDS Examination within four months from the date on which the result of the examination held in November, 2008 was published. In such circumstances, in the interests of justice, I am of the opinion that the petitioners should be permitted to appear for the fourth year BDS Part I Examination commencing on 17.12.2009 if they have the required attendance in the fourth year classes. I accordingly direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for the fourth year BDS Part I Examination commencing on 17.12.2009 if they have the required attendance. If the petitioners have the required attendance, the respondents shall permit them to appear for the examination and also make necessary arrangements by issuing hall tickets and by providing the requisite number of question paper booklets and answer books.' In the same, the learned Single Judge has considered the entire aspect of the case threadbare and in fact entered specific findings in respect all the contentions of the parties on merits, which is squarely applicale to the case of the petitioner also. I respectfully agree with the conclusions of the learned Judge. Therefore, I am satisfied that this w.p.c.36669/09 5 writ petition itself can be disposed of in terms of that order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of confirming the interim order dated 18.12.2009. In view of the above decision, the respondents are directed to publish the results of the petitioner's examination which the petitioner has written on the strength of the interim order dated 18.12.2009 as if the petitioner has appeared for the examination validly. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge