IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2009 / 15TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27742 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JUBY C.MAMMEN, D/O.C.T.MAMMEN, CHITTEZHATH HOUSE, INDUSTRIAL NAGAR P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686106. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.T.A.SHAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 27742 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. C.S.Manu, 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 Electronics and Communication Engineering held in May-June 2009 by the Mahatma Gandhi University. The results were published in August 2009. The petitioner failed in the paper “VHDL”. She has therefore applied for revaluation of her answer script by submitting Ext.P2 application dated 14.9.2009. The petitioner has also paid the requisite fee prescribed for revaluation. The petitioner submits that she has done well in the examination and that she is sure to secure a pass if her answer script is revalued. She submits that she intends to pursue higher studies and that unless her answer script is revalued expeditiously, she will be put to serious prejudice. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to W.P.(C) No. 27742/09 2 revalue her answer script expeditiously and 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 petitioner's answer script cannot be singled out and revalued as it will lead to loss of confidentiality. He also submits that as per the Examination Manual, the University requires 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. He further submits that the petitioner's application for revaluation will be considered and her answer script revalued, if her application is in order, within the aforesaid period. 4. The Examination Manual is not a statutory regulation. It is 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 W.P.(C) No. 27742/09 3 students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that 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 answer script described in Ext.P2 and to communicate the result to the petitioner 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. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps W.P.(C) No. 27742/09 4