IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 28976 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI AGED 20, S/O.JOHNSON MANAYANI MANAYANI LANE, MONASTRY ROAD COCHIN-682011. BY ADV. SRI.ROY THOMAS SRI.PIUS K NEDUMGATTU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CALICUT UNIVERSITY REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, THENJIPALAM CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO MALAPPURAM. 2. REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO, THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM. 3. VICE CHANCELLOR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO., THENKJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM. 4. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS OF DO.DO. ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY. FOR R1 TO 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).28976/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is in the 8th semester L.L.B student in Law College, Thrissur, is aggrieved by what he perceives as a serious default on the part of the University in undertaking the valuation of the 6th semester examinations. Petitioner found that in two papers in the 6th semester examination, he has scored quite low marks and therefore, he applied for revaluation. It was pointed out in Ext.P3 representation submitted by the petitioner' father that there has been pervasive failure among students of the Thrissur Law College and therefore, it may not really be a case of default on the part of the petitioner alone, but it would be a reflection of a more serious problem as regards the valuation in general. 2. It is therefore, that the petitioner has approached this Court praying the following reliefs:- W.P.(C).28976/2008 2 (i). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to investigate upon the petitioner's Ext.P3 petition added by Ext.P1 petition submitted by his father guardian. (ii). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders commanding respondents 2 and 4 to publish the revaluation results of the petitioner's marks in 6th semester L.L.B Examination forthwith. 3. University has filed a counter affidavit. In paragraph 3 of the said counter affidavit, it is stated that on publication of the results of certain examinations conducted by the University, they received complaints regarding mass failure in the examinations in certain papers. Accordingly, the Syndicate of the University considered the matter in detail in its meeting held on 18.9.2008 and has resolved to conduct a random valuation and if any large scale discrepancy is detected in the original marks, the Controller of Examinations was authorized to conduct revaluation of all answer W.P.(C).28976/2008 3 scripts in the relevant subjects in which mass failure occurred. Accordingly, random valuation has been conducted. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the University that revaluation of the petitioner's answer scrip has been undertaken and the results of the revaluation will be published without further delay, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Submission is recorded. 4. Petitioner's father has pointed out a more serious and pervasive issue in Ext.P3. It is open to him to pursue the same, if it is found that the problems faced by the petitioner is not mitigated by the revaluation. Subject to the above, writ petition is closed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs