IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2011 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 30914 of 2007(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- REJIMON.M.R., MADAYITHARA HOUSE, EZHUPUNNA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, ST.ALBERT'S COLLEGE, BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL FOR R3 ADV.T.A.SHAJI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2.6.2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 30914/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE MARK LIST DTD.23.5.07. P2. COPY OF THE MARK LIST DTD.10.1.07. P3. COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DTD.27.9.07 IN W.P.(C).No. 25260/06. P4. COPY OF THE PETITION BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 30914 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner appeared for the final year B.Sc. Zoology examination of the Mahatma Gandhi University in March-April 2007. Petitioner's results were not declared. The petitioner submits that the reason for withholding is stated to be shortage of attendance. But the petitioner was not issued with any notice regarding the same so far. According to the petitioner, after having permitted the petitioner to write the examination by issuing a hall ticket, the University cannot now withhold the results of the examination. 2. The learned standing counsel for the University points out that as is evident from Ext.P4 itself, the petitioner himself admitted that the petitioner did not have the required attendance to write the examination. He further points out that from Ext.P4, it can be seen that during an earlier occasion, for the same course, the petitioner had obtained condonation of shortage of attendance to enable him to write the examination. As per the rules of the University shortage of attendance can be condoned only once for a particular course. Therefore the learned counsel for the University submits that there is no merit in the claim of the petitioner insofar as without sufficient attendance the petitioner is not entitled to write the examination. The w.p.c.30914/07 2 learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier condoning of attendance was not by the University, but by the principal himself. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. I am of opinion that insofar as the petitioner has already invoked the jurisdiction of the Vice Chancellor by filing Ext.P4 petition, it is only appropriate that the Vice Chancellor considers and passes orders on Ext.P4 expeditiously. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Vice Chancellor of the Mahatma Gandhi University to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge