IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1795 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30632/2011 Dated 19/11/2011 .................... APPELLANT : PETITIONER ------------------------ REMYA JACOB, D/O. JACOB, AGED 19 YEARS, ROLL NO. 09403085, 5TH SEMESTER ECE, TKM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR. ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR. SEBASTIAN JOSEPH (KURISUMMOOTTIL) MR. J .S.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENTS : RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, TKM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KOLLAM - 680 001. BY STANDING COUNSEL MR. GEORGE POOTHOTTAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. C.J. & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.A. No. 1795 Of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 23rd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon J. The appellant along with some other students, who were pursuing studies for B.Tech in the 3rd respondent College, were taking part in the semester examinations held on 14.11.2011, when the Malpractice Prevention Squad of University inspected the college and found that the appellant/petitioners in concerned writ petitions were indulging in malpractices contrary to the general instructions contained in the hall tickets issued to them. Pursuant to the said event, the appellant was prevented from participating in further examinations, as in the case of the other students, who were prima facie found guilty, which made them to approach this Court for appropriate relief. 2. All the writ petitions were considered together by the learned Single Judge, who observed that the enquiry was going on and that the position had to be unearthed with reference to the actual facts and figurers. Referring to the law declared by the Apex Court on the point in Director of Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Hotel management, Nutrition and Catering Technology, Chandigarh Vs. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan (2009 (1) SCC W.A No. 1795 of 2011 :2: 59) and also taking note of the submission made from the part of the University, that the University was ready and willing to have the enquiry completed within two months and if the writ petitioners were found innocent of the allegations levelled against them, the University would conduct necessary supplementary examination, the writ petitions were dismissed, recording the submission as aforesaid. It is against the said verdict, that the appellant has chosen to approach this Court by filing the present appeal. 3. Heard the learned senior counsel Sri. Abraham Vakkanal appearing for the appellant at length. 4. The sequence of events is not disputed. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that no prejudice whatsoever has been resulted to the appellant under any circumstances. The interest of the appellant stands well protected by virtue of the specific observations in paragraph 4 of the said judgment. We find not reason to interfere. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. Sd/- MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE /True copy/ kmd P.A. to Judge