IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 5TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 35484 of 2009(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MANOJ KUMAR. S, 40/6383 AROGYA, CONVENT ROAD, KOCHI. BY ADV. SMT.K.SUNITHA VINOD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, UNIVERSITY PO THENJIPPALAM, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, UNIVERSITY PO THENJIPPALAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 35484/2009-E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE HALL TICKET BEARING REG.NO.642. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER WITH CODE NUMBER D48987 A. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08/08/2009 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REMINDER APPLICATION DATED 07/09/2009. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER DATED 14/12/2009. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.35484 of 2009 (E) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a B.Tech student in N.S.S.College of Engineering, Palakkad affiliated to the respondent University. It is stated that he completed his B.Tech course in Instrumentation and Control Engineering in the year 1995 and passed all papers, except 'IC-404 Electronic Instrumentation-I' of 4th semester. In the year 2008, the University issued a notification providing a last chance to students, who were covered by earlier schemes, by scheduling supplementary examinations to be held on 22/11/2008. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for appearing in the supplementary examination and obtained registration. He was issued Ext.P1 hall ticket. He appeared for the supplementary examination that was held. Ext.P2 is the question paper of the examination. In June, 2009, the result of the examination was declared. However, petitioner's result was not declared. He made representations and in spite of it, his result was not declared. Finally, an application made by the petitioner for disclosure of the WP(C) No.35484/2009 -2- reasons invoking the provisions of the Right to Information Act was also turned down by the University as per Ext.P5. It is thereafter that this writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent University to publish the result of IC 404: Electronic Instrumentation-I of the 4th semester engineering (Old Scheme), the supplementary examination of which was held on 22/11/2008. 2. The respondent University has filed an affidavit. From the affidavit, it would appear that though the petitioner appeared for the examination with registration No.642 and the answer script was despatched to the University, despite best efforts, the University could not trace out the answer script of the petitioner. It is stated that it was therefore that the result of the petitioner was not declared. It is stated that even thereafter, an intense search was made to trace out the answer script, but the answer script could not be traced out. The University states that the possibility is that the answer script might have got mixed up with some other answer scripts. 3. From this it is evident that although the petitioner had appeared for the examination, his answer script is untraceable. In such situation, the offer made by the petitioner to remedy his WP(C) No.35484/2009 -3- grievance is that a special examination under the old scheme could be held for the petitioner. In my view, although, the circumstances which led to the loss of answer script need to be gone into by the University at their end, so that such incident do not repeat in future, in so far as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, the only available remedy is to conduct a separate examination for him. Therefore, I direct that the University shall without insisting on the petitioner submitting another application or remitting the fee, schedule a separate examination for the petitioner, giving the petitioner sufficient time to get prepared and to appear for the examination. Thereupon, the answer paper shall be valued and result shall be declared, without any further delay. The whole exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. At the same time, the University shall also conduct necessary enquiry, take steps for avoiding such mishappenings in future. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg