IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29482 of 2009(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. C.M. GANESH PRABHU, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.C.B. MOHANAN, RESIDING AT 35/1210-B, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. 2. ASHWIN PRABHAKAR, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT 'SREE PADMAM', 491/B, VIKASVANI, THENGODE P.O., KAKKANAD, COCHIN-30. 3. JOSE GEORGE, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT KIZHAHHETTU PARAMBIL (H) PALATHURTH, COCHIN-20. 4. THOMAS SEBASTIAN, AGED 21 YEARS, RESIDING AT PANACHIKAVAYILIL (H) 37/1923, KOMOROTH LANE, AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN-17. 5. R. BHAGYANATH, AGED 21 YEARS, RESIDING AT PATTARUVEETIL HOUSE, EDAVANAKAD P.O., COCHIN-02. 6. ROHIT CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT PHRWA-11, POWER HOUSE ROAD, COCHIN-25. 7. ROSHAN SORLY, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT EDAMPADATH HOUSE, PAINEAPAPILLY P.O., MULANTHURUTHY, COCHIN-14. 8. RIKI ALBERTS, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1/610, PETER CELLIE STREET, FORT COCHIN, COCHIN-01. BY ADV. MR.A.G.ADITYA SHENOY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM, KERALA. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM, KERALA. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29482 of 2009 - E ---------------------------------------- Dated 19th October, 2009 Judgment Heard Sri.A.G.Aditya Shenoy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi Unviersity. 2. The petitioners appeared for the fifth semester B.B.M. degree examination conducted by the Mahatma Gandhi University in December, 2008. The results were published in July, 2009. The petitioners failed in various papers namely, 'Cost Accounting for Business-II' and 'Computer Application in Business'. They have therefore applied for revaluation of their answer scripts by submitting Ext.P1 series of applications. They have also paid the requisite fee as can be seen from Ext.P2 series of receipts. The petitioners submit that they have done well in the examination and are sure to secure a pass if their answer scripts are revalued. It is submitted that they have completed their course of study and have also passed the other semester examinations. In these circumstances, the W.P.(C) No.29482/2009 2 petitioners seek a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to take steps to revalue their answer scripts described in Ext.P1 series of applications and to communicate the result expeditiously. 3. Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University submits that petitioners' answer scripts 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 petitioners' applications for revaluation will be considered and their answer scripts revalued, if their applications are 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 W.P.(C) No.29482/2009 3 applications for revaluation without wasting any time and that unless applications for revaluation are expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to the students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that the 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 scripts described in Ext.P1 series of applications and to communicate the results to the petitioners within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge vaa