IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 24TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25917 of 2009(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- DIVYA V.NAIR, D/O.VASUDEVAN NAIR, AGED 21 YEARS, DEEPTHI, MUPPATHADAM P.O., ALUVA, KOCHI - 683 110. BY ADV. MR.K.S.DILIP MR.SAJU N.A. MR.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL SMT.G.LEKHA SMT.P.J.FLONY SMT.UMA.G.KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No.25917 of 2009-H ------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.K.S.Dilip, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University. 2. The petitioner appeared for the 8th semester B.Tech. Degree examination in Electronics and Communication Engineering held in May/June, 2009 by the Mahatma Gandhi University. The results were published in August 2009. The petitioner submits that as she did not get the marks she expected in Medical Electronics, she applied for revaluation of her answer script by submitting the original of Ext.P2 application dated 10.9.2009. She has also paid the requisite fee, it is submitted. The petitioner submits that she is sure to secure a pass if her answer script is revalued. She also submits that she has passed all the other semester examinations. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to revalue her answer script in Medical Electronics and to communicate the result to her expeditiously, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 3. Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University submits that as per the stipulations in the W.P(C) No.25917 of 2009-H 2 Examination Manual, the University requires 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process and that the petitioners' answer script cannot be singled out and revalued as it will lead to loss of confidentiality. He also submits that the University will revalue the petitioners' answer script and communicate the result within the said period of 81 days, if the application is otherwise in order. 4. The Examination Manual is not a statutory regulation. It is only a Manual prepared by the University for its guidance. The stipulations in the Examination Manual cannot, in my opinion, operate to the detriment of students. A Division Bench of this Court has in University of Kerala v. Sandhya P. Pai (1991 (1) KLT 812) held that the University should hurry with applications for revaluation without wasting any time and that unless applications for revaluation are expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to the students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that the University should not wait for the expiry of 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the revaluation of the petitioners' answer script referred to in Ext.P2 and to communicate the result to her within six weeks from the date on which she produces a certified copy of this W.P(C) No.25917 of 2009-H 3 judgment before the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab