IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 12045 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- TEENA NAZAR, FATHIMA DALE, OPP. ST. ANTONY'S CHURCH, WADI, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN 682022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN 682022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC,COCHI U FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. True copy of receipt showing the remittance of fee for Consolidated Mark list and PC issued by the 2nd respondent. Ext.P2. True copy of receipt showing the remittance of fee for B. Tech degree certificate and application from search fee. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 12045OF 2010(E) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner completed her B. Tech course in Civil Engineering from the first respondent University and she passed the examinations in May, 2005. Her certificates have not been released by the University so far. It is with this grievance the writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the University is that after completing the course, using the mark list and provisional certificate issued to yet another candidate, petitioner secured employment. It is stated that on receipt of the information from the employer of the petitioner, University got a crime registered not only against the petitioner but also others who helped her in comitting the aforesaid offence. It is stated that because of the pendency of the crime that the certificate has not been issued to the petitioner. 3. Irrespective of the sustainability or otherwise of the criminal case that is now pending against the petitioner, fact remains that the petitioner has completed the course and passed the final examination. University also accepts this fact. If that be WPC.No. 12045/2010 :2 : so, in my view the petitioner is entitled to be issued her certificate. University has not shown me any regulation enabling the University to decline to issue certificate. Standing counsel for the University relied on Ext.R1(b), the proceedings of the the Syndicate, which show that a decision not to issue certificate till the proceedings are completed has been taken by the Syndicate. In the absence of a regulation enabling such a resolution, I am not persuaded to decline the relief to the petitioner. 4. In that view of the matter, I direct the respondents to issue certificate to the petitioner within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment, without prejudice to the rights of the University to continue the proceedings that are initiated against her. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 12045/2010 :3 :