IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 27320 of 2011(L) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. SHANU KRISHNA.S, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.SHAJI, MISSION PARAMBIL, MOOLAVATTOM P.O., KOTTAYAM. 2. NIKHIL.P.PILLAI, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN PILLAI, AJANTHA, AZHIYIDATHUCHIRA, THIRUVALLA. 3. SAM VARGHESE, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, SAJI BHAVAN, ERAMATHOOR P.O., MANNAR, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE SRI.JOHN VIPIN SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR-686 001. BY ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 29180 OF 2011 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO.27320/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COURSE CERTIFICATE OF IST PETITIONER DTD.18.6.2010. P2: COPY OF THE COURSE CERTIFICATE OF 2ND PETITIONER DTD.18.6.2010. P3: COPY OF THE COURSE CERTIFICATE OF 3RD PETITIONER DTD.18.6.2010. P4: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 4.10.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM REPORTED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 9.10.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL ANNEXURE 1:COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF WPC. NO.32140/2008 DATED 01/12/2008. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) NoS.27320, 29180, 30146 & 30765 of 2011 ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Issues raised in these writ petitions are common and, therefore, these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Petitioners are students, who have completed B.Tech course in colleges which are affiliated to the first respondent University. They were admitted during the year 2006-07 and 2007-08. However, they have not successfully passed the examinations of some of the papers of the 1st and 2nd semesters and are desirous of appearing in the supplementary examination. 3. By Ext.P1 notification dated 04.10.2011 (in W.P (C) No.29180/2011), the University notified supplementary examinations for the semesters 3, 5, 7 and 8. Subsequently, based on the representations that were received from the students, Ext.P2 notification (in W.P(C) W.P.(C) No.27320/2011 & connected cases : 2 : No.29180/2011) was issued on 21.10.2011, notifying the supplementary examinations for semesters 4 and 6 also. In other words, by Exts.P1 and P2, the University is proposing to conduct supplementary examination for semesters 3 to 8. 4. However, the University has not notified supplementary examination for semesters 1 and 2 and petitioners in W.P.(C) No.29180/2011 have filed Ext.P3 representation, requesting the University to conduct a supplementary examination for 1st and 2nd semesters also. No action was taken by the University on their representation. This made them to file this writ petition, seeking mainly a direction to the respondent University to conduct supplementary examination for 1st and 2nd semesters also, along with the supplementary examination, which are already notified. 5. The Standing Counsel for the University has filed a statement in W.P(C) No.27320/2011, which has been adopted as a common statement. According to the W.P.(C) No.27320/2011 & connected cases : 3 : University, initially, Year Out System was prevailing, which has been dispensed with from 2005. It is stated that, irrespective of whether the students pass in the semester examination or not, they are now entitled to continue the course till the 8th semester. It is also stated that, in 2005, in a meeting between the Vice Chancellor and the Principals of the Colleges, it was decided to conduct the 1st and 2nd, 4th and 6th semester supplementary examinations in April only and the 3rd, 5th and 7th semester supplementary examinations in October only and the 8th semester examination both in April and October. 6. It is also stated that this new system to conduct supplementary examination based on an odd and even method was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C) No.32140/2008 and that by Annexure-1 judgment rendered on 01.12.2008, this Court upheld the same. Therefore, the contention raised is that, the University has no liability to conduct supplementary examination for 1st and 2nd semester W.P.(C) No.27320/2011 & connected cases : 4 : students as sought for by the petitioners in these cases. 7. From the statement filed and from the judgment that is relied on, although such a decision as claimed was taken by the University and that this Court has upheld the same, it appears that the University itself was not complying with this decision. Ext.P4 in W.P(C) No.29180/2011 is a notification issued by the University on 29.03.2011, scheduling the supplementary examinations for semesters 1 to 5 together. Similarly, Ext.P5 is another notification issued by the University on 8.10.2010, which also shows that a supplementary examination for semesters 1 and 2 was scheduled in November, 2010. These documents, therefore, support the case of the petitioners that the University itself did not follow its decision to conduct supplementary examinations in the manner as decided by the Vice Chancellor in the meeting held with the Principals of the Colleges. In such circumstances, the University cannot rely upon its aforesaid decision to defeat the claim of the petitioners. If that be so, I W.P.(C) No.27320/2011 & connected cases : 5 : see no reason why this time supplementary examinations for students of the 1st and 2nd semesters should not be held by the University. 8. In that view of the matter, I dispose of these writ petitions, directing that the University shall take appropriate decision for conducting the supplementary examinations for 1st and 2nd semester students and on that basis, the calendar will be published, without any delay. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment and a copy of the writ petition before the University for compliance. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/23/11 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge