IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 1587 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- BINCY K.B., DAUGHTER OF MR.K.O.BABY, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT "GREEN FIELDS", 6/854, YMCA CROSS ROAD, CALICUT-673 001. BY ADVS.MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR MR.K.JOHN MATHAI MR.P.BENNY THOMAS MR.P.GOPINATH MR.V.J.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRESIDENT, BOARD OF EXAMINERS, THE KERALA NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-35. 3. THE REGISTRAR, THE KERALA NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-35. 4. THE DIRECTOR, THE DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.N.SANTHOSH R3 BY ADV. MR.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON 11/03/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 1587 of 2010-W - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT Seeking for the grant of distinction in the examination in question, as the petitioner has obtained more than 80% marks in the examination, this writ petition has been filed. 2. The petitioner was a student of General Nursing and Midwifery Integrated Course in the Lourdes School of Nursing, Ernakulam during the academic years 2005-2008. The course is one conducted as per the registration, etc. granted by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council. During 2005 the Council extended the course duration for the General Nursing and Midwifery Course from 3 years to 3 years and 6 months. Exts.P1 to P4 are copies of the mark lists for the respective years and Exts.P5 and P6 are the certificates of diploma and certificate of registration. Going by the marks obtained, the petitioner has secured a total marks of 1274 which is 80.85%. As per the prospectus, the examination is graded on aggregate marks of the entire three and a half years of the training programme and a candidate securing 80% and above is eligible for distinction. wpc 1587/2010 2 3. Ext.P8 representation submitted by the petitioner was replied as per Ext.P9. From the reply, what is discernible is that the aggregate marks of the three years only are taken for the purpose of ranking. 1280/1600 marks is required for grant of distinction. The same is under challenge in this writ petition. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents cannot go beyond the prospectus. It is evident from the prospectus that a candidate is entitled for distinction if he or she obtains 80% and above and the examination shall be graded on aggregate marks of the entire three and half years of the training programme. It is therefore submitted that the same is binding on the respondents and the petitioner is entitled to be granted distinction. 5. It is pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent that even after the enhancement of the period of course to 3 years and 6 months in 2005, the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council continued to conduct the annual examinations for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd years. The conduct of examination for the last six months, viz. Internship Examination was entrusted with the respective Nursing Schools. There was wpc 1587/2010 3 no uniformity in the matter of setting up of question papers for internship examinations which paved way for lot of allegations of favouritism also. Ext.R3(a) is the decision of the Executive Committee of the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council dated 21,10.2009 wherein only it was decided to entrust the conduct of Internship Examination also to the Council and to count the marks obtained by the students in the said examination for grading. Earlier, guidelines were there which stipulated that marks awarded to the students in the Internship Examinations will not be considered for ranking/grading. 6. It is therefore, submitted that the marks of the Internship Examination will not be reckoned for the purpose of grading. In the counter affidavit, in para 4 it is averred that the same yardstick was adopted by the third respondent in respect of all the other students who had appeared in the examination along with the petitioner as well as in respect of the batch of students who completed the GNM course after the passing out of the petitioner's batch and therefore there is no discrimination. What was argued by the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent is that the provisions contained in the prospectus are not binding on the Kerala Nurses and Midwifery Council. 7. It is clear that the guidelines are being issued by the Council alone. wpc 1587/2010 4 Therefore, whatever may be the stipulations in the prospectus issued by the individual institutions, the same may not be binding on the Council. For awarding the grade, etc. the Council is governed by their own rules and regulations. The decision of the Council thus not to consider the marks of Internship Examination for ranking/grading, cannot be said to be arbitrary. The same have been uniformly applied to all the students also. The said decision was taken in the light of the fact that they found that there is no uniformity in awarding marks and there are allegations by way of favouritism also, as the institutions alone were preparing the question papers of Internship Examination. 7. In that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot contend that she is entitled for grant of distinction. There is no irregularity or illegality in the matter. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/