IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2011 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1933 WA.No. 1166 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20723/2010 Dated 06/07/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. DEEPAK JOSEPH, S/O.N.T.JOSEPH, AGED 22 YEARS, PLACKAL HOUSE, THOTTAIKKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM. 2. FEBIN JOHN FRANCIS, "NELFI", ST.ANDREWS, ST.XAVIER'S COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHIMOJ M.V., M.V.HOUSE, ANNOOR P.O., PAYYANNUR-VIA., KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. ANAKHA P., SREENILAYAM, KALLERI BHAGAM P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. PRIYANGA PUSHKARAN, VELLASSERI HOUSE, LAL SALAM ROAD, PACHALAM P.O., KOCHI-12. 6. THOUFEEQ P.N., PLANCHUVATTIL MALAYIL HOUSE, PADUTHODU P.O., VENNIKKULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA RESPONDENT(S): / RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. WA NO.1166/2010 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & RESEARCH, PUTHUPALLY, PUTHUPPALLY P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 001. ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY FOR R1,2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.A. No.1166 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to direct the University to permit the appellants/ petitioners to write the 4th year B.Pharm examination. 2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Standing Counsel Shri.T.A.Shaji appearing for the University. 3. In the Examination Regulations for this Course, the University stipulates that those students who have passed all subjects in the 2nd year examination only are entitled to write the 4th year examination. The appellants having failed in the 2nd year regular examinations, wrote supplementary examination in January, 2010. The 4th year examinations were to be held in July, 2010. Since the result of the supplementary W.A.No.1166/2010 2 examinations was not published, the appellants were not entitled to write the 4th year examination that was held in July, 2010. 4. The WP(C) filed was dismissed by the learned Single Judge holding that passing of the 2nd year examinations is a mandatory requirement of the Examination Regulations to write the 4th year examinations. However, in the Writ Appeal filed the Division Bench of this Court taking into account the delay in the publication of the results of the 2nd year supplementary examinations written by the appellants in January, 2010, through interim orders permitted the appellants to write the 4th year examinations. Ultimately when the supplementary examination results were published, appellants 1, 2, 3 & 5 have passed the same. The 4th appellant had not written the final year examination inspite of the interim orders issued by this Court. The 6th appellant has not passed the supplementary examinations written in January, 2010, but wrote the examination subsequently and passed the 2nd year examinations. Later through interim orders dated W.A.No.1166/2010 3 04/01/2011, the Division Bench directed publication of the results of the 4th year examinations written by appellants 1, 2 3 & 5 and the University has published the same. Even though learned counsel for the appellants submitted that appellants 1, 2, 3 & 5 have passed the examination, learned Standing Counsel for the University has not verified the correctness of the same. We do not think there is any necessity for us to consider the result of the 4th year examinations written by the appellants under interim orders of this Court. All what we have to consider is whether the interim orders issued by this Court should be made absolute as part of the judgment. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for the University opposed the claim of the appellants to write the examinations overlooking the Examination Regulations, because according to him, pending results in any of the supplementary examinations do not authorise the appellants to write the examination. We are unable to agree with this contention, even though we do not find any justification for overlooking the Examination Regulations of the University, which requires W.A.No.1166/2010 4 passing of the 2nd year examinations as a condition for writing the 4th year examination. However, what we find is that even within the six months from the date of writing the supplementary examinations by the appellants, the University did not publish the results. If the results were published at least within six months' from the date of the examinations, certainly appellants 1,2, 3 & 5 would have been able to write the 4th year examinations as a matter of right without any necessity to approach this Court. It is only on account of the delay on the part of the University in publishing the results of the 2nd year supplementary examinations, this Court allowed the appellants to write the 4th year examinations pending publication of the results of the 2nd year examinations and subject to the result of the Writ Appeal. Admittedly, appellants 1, 2, 3 & 5 have passed the 2nd year supplementary examinations written by them in January, 2010. We therefore, feel that appellants 1, 2, 3 & 5 are entitled to get the results of the 4th year examinations written by them under interim orders of this Court published. This has already been done under W.A.No.1166/2010 5 earlier interim orders of this Court. The interim orders therefore are made absolute in respect of appellants 1, 2, 3 & 5, and we direct the University to release their mark lists. However, so far as the 6th appellant is concerned, he has not passed the 2nd year supplementary examinations written by him in January, 2010, which was the basis for permitting him to write the 4th year examinations under interim orders of this Court. Therefore, the examinations written by him for the 4th year has to be cancelled, and we direct the University to do so. We clarify that this judgment should not be interpreted as diluting the Examination Regulations of the University, wherein the requirement is passing of the 2nd year examinations for writing the 4th year examinations. This Writ Appeal is allowed in part as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg