IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27584 of 2009(P) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- DEEPAK PILLAI K.P., SHREE SHREYAS, KUTTEMPAROOR P.O., MANNAR, ALLEPPY. BY MR.K.R.MICHAEL, ADVOCATE. MR.FRANCIS JOSEPH KURISINKAL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. BY MR. T.A. SHAJI, SC, MG UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 27584 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. K.R.Michael, 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 supplementary 7th semester B.Tech degree examination and 8th semester B.Tech degree examination in Mechanical Engineering held in May-June 2009 by the Mahatma Gandhi University. The results were published in August 2009. The petitioner failed in two papers of the supplementary 7th semester B.Tech degree examination and four papers of the 8th semester B.Tech degree examination. He has therefore applied for revaluation of his answer scripts in the said papers by submitting Exts.P1 and P1(a) applications. The petitioner has also paid the requisite fee prescribed for revaluation. The petitioner submits that he has passed all the other semester examinations and that if his answer scripts are revalued, he is sure to secure a pass. He submits that as he has completed his course W.P.(C) No. 27584/09 2 of study, the respondents may be directed to revalue his answer scripts described in Ext.P1 and P1(a) applications expeditiously and 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 petitioner's answer scripts cannot be singled out and revalued as it will lead to loss of confidentiality. He also submits that as per the Examination Manual, the University requires 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. He further submits that the petitioner's application for revaluation will be considered and his answer scripts revalued, if his applications are in order, within the aforesaid period. 4. The Examination Manual is not a statutory regulation. It is 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 W.P.(C) No. 27584/09 3 expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to the students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that 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 answer scripts described in Exts.P1 and P1(a) applications and to communicate the result to the petitioner within six weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps