IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 18TH APRIL 2008 / 29TH CHAITHRA 1930 W.P(C).No. 11061 of 2008(P) --------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. M.R.ARUNRAJ, 3RD YEAR B.V.SC & A.H. STUDENT, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR - 680 551. 2. BERIN P.VARGHESE, 3RD YEAR B.V.SC & A.H.STUDENT, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR - 680 551. 3. ABIN BABY MATHEW, 2ND YEAR B.V.SC & A.H.STUDENT, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR - 680 551. 4. R.AZEEM, 2ND YEAR B.V.SC & A.H.STUDENT COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR - 680 551. 5. AJAS MOHAMMED, 2ND YEAR B.V.SC & A.H. STUDENT, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR - 680551. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES, VELLANIKKARA, KAU PO, TRICHUR - 680 656, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE DEAN, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES, MANNUTHY, TRICHUR DISTRICT - 680 551. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN, SC,KERALA AGRL.UTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON 18.04.2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.11061/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are students of Bachelor of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry in the 1st respondent College. On the allegation that they were involved in ragging another student of the College leading to an attempted suicide, they were placed under suspension w.e.f. 31/10/2007 and a criminal case was also registered and later, the District and Sessions Court, Trichur in its order dated 25.1.2008 in Crl.M.C.No.118/08, enlarged the petitioners on bail. 2. Challenging the orders placing them under suspension, a writ petition was filed before this court as W.P.(c).No.5137/08, which was disposed of by Ext.P1 judgment, directing that the disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioners shall be finalised W.P.(C) 11061/08 2 expeditiously. Petitioners submit that an Enquiry Committee, that was already constituted by the respondents by order dated 24.10.2007, submitted its report and pursuant to Ext.P1 judgment, the matter was finalised by Ext.P2 order. By this order, the petitioners were permitted to continue studies from 6.3.2008 subject to the conditions mentioned in the said order. 3. Condition No.2, which is relevant for the purpose of this case reads as follows; “The period of suspension from 31.10.2007 to the date of order(4/3/2008) shall be treated as absence for all academic programmes of the University.” 4. Based on the order dated 4.3.008, petitioners were allowed to continue their studies from 6.3.2008. According to the petitioners, on resumption of their studies they were permitted to appear for the internal practical and internal theory examinations that were held subsequently. It is W.P.(C) 11061/08 3 stated that during the period between 31.10.2007 and 4.3.2008, when they were remaining under suspension, the petitioners were unable to appear for some of the examinations that were held during that period. According to them, in view of the order dated 4.3.2008 permitting them to resume their studies, they should be permitted to appear for the supplementary examination for the subjects for which they could not attend. 5. They submitted Exts.P3 to P7 applications to the University seeking admission to the supplementary examination. It is contended that the applications were forwarded by the students advisor and were recommended by the course teachers and Head of the Departments. Petitioners also submit that, students who were absent for regular examination, due to games, camps and other events were permitted to write supplementary examinations and therefore claimed that they too should be permitted to appear for supplementary examinations. W.P.(C) 11061/08 4 6. On behalf of the respondents, the standing counsel has filed a statement dated 2nd April, 2008. It is stated that the petitioners were suspended by oder dated 31.10.2007 on grounds of alleged ragging leading to suicidal attempt by a student by name Sri. Manu.M. It is stated that the period of suspension was till 4.3.2008 and they were permitted to continue their studies from 6.3.2008. According to the University, as per the order dated 4.3.2008, the period of suspension shall be treated as absence for all academic programmes of the University and examination schedule is also a part of the academic programme. Therefore, the contention raised is that in view of the order that the period of suspension will be treated as absence for all academic programmes, petitioners cannot claim to be included in the supplementary examination as well. 7. It is also stated that, as per the orders of the University, duly filled up applications for supplementary W.P.(C) 11061/08 5 examination shall be submitted within 5 working days, after the end of the examination schedule and that the petitioners have not submitted the application forms in time. It is also stated that, in terms of the order dated 12.7.2001 issued by the University, supplementary examination will be conducted only for those students with genuine reasons such as accident, hospitalization, contingent deceases etc. It is stated that, reasons other than the above three will not be considered by the University and that in the case of the petitioners none of these three reasons are available. 8. It is also stated that, as per the Academic Regulation, Rule 26.1, the minimum requirement of attendance to be eligible for appearing in the examination shall be 80% for each subject/paper, failing which the candidates shall not be considered to have successfully completed the course for the subject concerned and that such candidates shall register again for the course in the W.P.(C) 11061/08 6 subject, when it is offered and satisfy the attendance requirement to appear in the examination. In so far as the petitioners are concerned, the contention of the University is that this condition also is not satisfied. According to the University those students who are short of the minimum required attendance shall be considered “incomplete” in the subject and will not be permitted to appear in the annual/board examinations for the concerned subject. On this basis, it is contended that, for shortage of attendance since the petitioners are not eligible to appear for the main examination, they are equally ineligible to appear for the supplementary examination. 9. I have considered the submissions made. It is the admitted position that the petitioners were found to have misbehaved with a junior student and remained under suspension for the period from 31.10.2007 till 4.3.2008 and they resumed their course only from 6.3.2008. While permitting the petitioners to continue their course by order W.P.(C) 11061/08 7 dated 4.3.2008, conditions were imposed by the University and one of the conditions was that the period of suspension shall be treated as absence for all academic programmes in the University. It cannot be disputed that the examination schedule is also a part of the academic programme. If that be so, petitioners cannot take advantage of the period between 31.10.2007 to 4.3.2008 for any purpose and the whole period will have to be treated as absence for all purposes. In such a case, availing credit for the aforesaid period, petitioners cannot claim to be eligible for appearing in the main examination. If they are ineligible for the main examination, they are also ineligible for the supplementary examination as well. Therefore, by operation of clause(2) of the order dated 4.3.2008, the petitioners cannot take advantage of the period from 31.10.2007 till 4.3.2008. 10. They are not only ineligible for the aforesaid reason, but also for the shortage of attendance that they have. That apart, the reasons stated by the University that W.P.(C) 11061/08 8 no applications have been received from the petitioners within the time specified in the academic orders and that only for those students with genuine reasons like accident, hospitalisation and contingent decease etc. supplementary examination is held are also equally valid. In paragraph 8 of the writ petition it is averred that students who have absented for games, camps and events, were permitted to write supplementary examination. But then even if the said averment is incorrect, this court will not be justified for treating the petitioners on a par with students who have absented for games, camps and events. 11. For these reasons, I do not think this court will be justified in directing the University to permit the petitioners to appear in the supplementary examinations. Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi.