IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 7273 of 2009(D) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ DR.BEENA MANOJ @ BEENA PHILIP EASOW, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O. DR.MANOJ V.MATHEW, RESIDING AT KAYALVARATHU, THEVALLY P.O., KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691009. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ FR.JOHNY THOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 7273 OF 2009 (D) ===================== Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. Petitioner submits that her maiden name was Dr.Beena Philip Easow and with that name she secured MD and DCH from Mumbai. She got married to Dr.Manoj Mathew and thereafter, by Ext.P1 Gazette notification, got her name changed into Dr.Beena Manoj. In the meanwhile, petitioner was admitted for Post Graduate Diploma Course in Development Neurology under the respondent University. In January 2009, though the final examination results were published, the petitioner's result was withheld for the reason that there was change in the name as compared to her maiden name. 3. It is stated that the College has written to the University reporting the correct facts as per Ext.P3 and she also has filed Ext.P5 representation before the Controller of the University along with Ext.P4 affidavit. However, the result is not still declared and it is in this background the writ petition has been filed. 4. If as stated by the petitioner, there has been a change of name consequent on her marriage, which has also been published in the WPC 7273/09 :2 : Gazette as per Ext.P1, petitioner is justified in seeking to have her results declared. 5. Still having regard to the fact that she has already approached the Controller of the University by filing Ext.P5, it is directed that the Controller of the University shall consider the said representation and pass orders thereon. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 2 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp