IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 18515 of 2008(D) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- PRIYANKA SANI, D/O.SANY FRANCIS, AGED 18 YEARS, REG.NO.4223383, HOLY FAMILY CONVENT GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR 680 020, RESIDING AT MANJALY HOUSE, MANJAPRA. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JOINT DIRECTOR (EXAM.), DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PRINCIPAL, HOLY FAMILY CONVENT GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR 680 020. BY GOVT. PLEADER A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 18515 OF 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner completed her Plus II course in Holy Family Convent Girls Higher Secondary School, Chembukkavu, Thrissur. The results of the examination were published in 2008. After receiving the mark list, the petitioner noticed that a clerical mistake has crept in the mark list issued from the office of the Joint Director, Directorate of Higher Secondary Education. According to the petitioner she has secured 20 marks in CE in Chemistry. But instead of 20, in the mark list it is shown as 15. Ext. P2 consolidated CE Score Register of Plus II for the year 2007 maintained and issued from the Holy Family Convent Girls Higher Secondary School shows that the petitioner has secured 20 marks in Chemistry. Ext. P3 letter dated 28.5.2008 was issued by the Principal to the 2nd respondent stating that instead of 20 marks it was erroneously recorded as 15 marks in the computer. The Principal states that the college admits the mistake and that it is W.P.(C) No. 18515/2008 2 only a clerical mistake on their part. In Ext. P3 it is requested to make necessary correction and save the mental strain of the student. A copy of CE mark list which was put up in the notice board was forwarded to the 2nd respondent along with Ext. P3. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 29.5.2008 to the 2nd respondent to take necessary steps to correct the mistake in the mark list. Ext. P4 is not disposed of by the 2nd respondent. 2. Reliefs prayed for by the Writ Petitioner are the following: a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and thereby command the 2nd respondent to rectify the mistake crept in, in Ext. P1 mark list in the light of Ext. P3 letter from the 3rd respondent; b) Grant such other reliefs, which are just and necessary in the interest of justice. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being the petitioner would be satisfied with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext. P4. The request W.P.(C) No. 18515/2008 3 is just and reasonable. I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext. P4 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition along with the copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent. If found necessary, the 2nd respondent shall call for the original records from the 3rd respondent school to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the contention raised by the petitioner. A copy of this judgment shall be sent by registered post by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent within a period of one week and shall produce proof of the same before the 2nd respondent. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of . K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE vkm