IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2011 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32690 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. HIMANSHU K.R., S/O.ARUN KR.SINGH, AGED 23, JANKI NAGA, HUANUMAN NAHAR, K.BASH, PATNA-20, NOW RESIDING AT C/O.ABDUL KARIM, P.K.NAGAR, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, COCHIN-682022. 2. MANISH KUMAR TIWARY, S/O.AMAL KUMAR TIWARI, AGED 23, RESIDING AT ROOM NO.92,BTECH BOYS HOSTEL, SOE, CUSAT, SOUTH KALAMASSERY-682022. BY ADV. SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CUSAT CAMPUS, KALAMASSERY-683104. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,CUSAT, KALAMASSERY-683104. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.32690/11 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1. TRUE COPY OF THE STUDENT IDENTITY CARD OF 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION FEE CHALAN FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3. THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.12.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P4. THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAVING BANK PASS BOOK OF 2ND PETITIONER TO SHOW THE IDENTITY. EXHIBIT-P5. THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION FEE CHALAN FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P6. THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.12.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 32690 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are B.Tech students. When the result of the 5th Semester examination was declared, petitioners failed in one paper viz., Micro Processor Based System Design. They applied for revaluation and approached this Court complaining of delay and seeking orders to expedite the revaluation. 2. I heard the Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent University. 3. Having regard to the above, I dispose of the writ petition directing the University to complete the revaluation sought for by the petitioners within 6 weeks of production of a copy of the judgment, provided the applications for revaluation have been received and are otherwise in order. Petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment before the University for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp