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. 25969 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- ANISH. M.S, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.K.A.MANICKAN, SYAMA QUARTERS, KODUMBU.PO, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. 2. REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, 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.25969 of 2009-M -------------------------------- Dated 15th September, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.T.H.Abdul Azeez, 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 Mechanical Engineering held in May/June, 2009 by the Mahatma Gandhi University. The results were published in August 2009. The petitioner failed in the paper Machine Design and Drawing II. He therefore applied for revaluation and scrutiny of the answer script by submitting Exts.P2 and P3 applications. He has also paid the requisite fee. The petitioner submits that he has passed all the other semester examinations and if his answer script is revalued, he is sure to secure a pass. He submits that he has been offered appointment pursuant to the campus selection and that unless his answer script in Machine Design and Drawing II is revalued, he will be put to serious prejudice. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to revalue his answer script and to publish the result expeditiously. He also seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow him to scrutinize the answer script 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 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. As regards scrutiny of the answer script, the learned standing counsel submits that scrutiny can be done within ten days from the date on which a copy of this judgment is received by the Mahatma Gandhi University. 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.P3 and to communicate the result to him 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. The Controller of Examinations shall, within ten days from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him also make arrangements for scrutiny of the answer script referred to in Ext.P2. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab