IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 386 of 2010(W) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- VISHNU V.NAIR, AGED 23, S/O. K.VINOD KUMAR, CRRA-45, CHIRAKULAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (STUDENT 1ST YEAR MBBS COURSE, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, KANNUR). BY ADVS.MR.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE MR.K.VINODKUMAR (707/89) SMT.K.V.LEKSHMY SMT.C.L.MANJU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, KANNUR UNIVERSITY CAMPUS P.O., PIN-670 567. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, KANNUR UNIVERSITY CAMPUS P.O., PIN-670 567. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, PARIYARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 503. 4. DR.VIJAYALAKSHMI, HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF PHYSIOLOGY, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, PARIYARAM, KANNUR, PIN-670 503. 5. DR.VALLIAMMA, HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF BIOCHEMISTRY, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, PARIYARAM, KANNUR, PIN-670 503. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY R3 BY MR.P.V.SURENDRANATH R4 & R5 BY MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.P.GOPINATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.385/20120 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF MARKS PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY IN WEBSITE. P2:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 10.11.2009 WITH POSTAL RECEIPT. P3:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE AND 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 10.11.2009 WITH POSTAL RECEIPT. P4:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. NIL WITH POSTAL RECEIPT DTD. 23.12.009. P5:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. NIL WITH POSTAL RECEIPT DTD. 23.12.2009. P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER SO ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL DTD. 18.11.2008. P7:- COPIES OF THE LSIT SHOWING THE ATTENDANCE IN THE SUBJECTS ANATOMY BIO-CHEMISTRY. P8:- COPIES OF THE LIST SHOWING THE ATTENDANCE IN THE SUBJECTS BIO- CHEMISTRY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R4(a):- COPY OF THE DETAILED RESUME OF MARKS FOR DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES, DTD. NIL. R4(b):- COPY OF THE EXAMINATION REGULATIONS FOR THE MBBS 2008-2014 BATCH, DTD. NIL. R4(c):- COPY OF THE MADE OF EVALUATION FOR THE THEORY PAPER AND THE SCHEDULE OF PRACTICAL EXAMINATION FOR THE PRE-CLINICAL SUBJECTS TO BE ADOPTED FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE EXAMINATION, DTD. NIL. R4(d):- COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF THE GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION GUIDELINES, 1997, PUBLISHED IN PART III SECTION 4, GAZETTE OF INDIA DTD. 17.5.1997. R4(e):- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT INTIMATING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS THE CHAIRPERSON, DTD. 12.10.2009. R4(f):- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT INTIMATING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS INTERNAL EXAMINER, DTD. 12.10.2009. R4(g):- COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B1.154/2008/ACME ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL, DTD. 6.7.09. R4(h):- COPY OF THE ANSWERR SHEET WRITTEN BY THE PETITIONER , DTD. NIL. R4(i):- COPY OF THE ANSWER PAPERS WRITTEN BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE IST SESSIONAL EXAMINATIONS, DTD. NIL. W.P.(C) NO.386/2010 R4(j):- COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 14.1.2010. R4(k):- COPY OF THE LETTER ADDESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 14.1.2010. R4(l):- COPY OF THE DIAGRAM OF THE AMPHIBIAN PRELOAD AND AFTER LOAD, AS EXTRACTED FROM THE TEXTBOOK OF HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY. DTD. NIL. R4(m):- COPY OF THE SHORT BIO-DATA SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. R5(a):- COPY OF THE MODE OF EVALUATION OF THEORY PAPER AND THE SCHEDULE OF PRACTICAL EXAMINATION FOR THE SUBJECT BIOCHEMISTRY, AS PRESCRIBED BY THE MCI AND AS ADOPTED BY THE DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DTD. NIL. R5(b):- COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED TO THE PRINCIPAL DTD. NIL. R5(c):- COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER OF THE 2ND SESSIONAL EXAMINATION DTD. 30.5.2009. R5(d):- COPY OF THE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS ALONG WITH THE RESPONSE SHEET DTD. NIL. R5(e):- COPY OF THE ANSWER SHEET BY THE PETITIONER FOR SECTION A, DTD. NIL. R5(f):- COPY OF THE ANSWER SHEET BY THE PETITIONER FOR SECTION B, DTD. NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 386 of 2010-W - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner who is a student of 1st year MBBS degree course at Pariyaram Medical College, is seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to conduct a re-examination for his clinical and practical examinations in the subjects Physiology and Biochemistry. 2. The examination was conducted in August, 2009 and result was published on 16.12.2009 which showed that the petitioner failed in clinical and practical examinations in the above two subjects. According to the petitioner, he failed in the examination in the light of the harassment meted out by respondents 4 and 5, viz. the Heads of Departments of Physiology and Biochemistry. Various circumstances have been pointed out in support of the plea. Exts.P2 and P3 are the complaints filed before the Controller of Examinations and the Principal of the Medical College. Exts.P4 and P5 are the complaints raised before respondents 2 and 3 in the matter. 3. Respondents 3 to 5 have filed detailed counter affidavits opposing the prayers of the petitioner. It is pointed out that the allegation of harassment is not correct. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. wpc386 /2010 2 4. In fact, a re-examination can be conducted only if any irregularities are reflected in the marks assigned to the petitioner. This is a matter entirely for the authorities of the University to consider. In these proceedings, as the factual aspects have been disputed by various parties, this Court cannot enter into any findings on such disputed questions of fact. Although learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the harassment is evident from the proceedings, it is stoutly denied by learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5. Therefore, I am relegating the petitioner to the remedy to approach the University itself in the matter. 5. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider Exts.P2 and P4 representations and to take a final decision after conducting due enquiry and after hearing the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. All opportunities should be given to the various parties to submit their statements and to produce evidence in the matter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/