IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10587 of 2011(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MISHIYAS.K IIIRD YEAR STUDENT, CENTURY DENTAL COLLEGE POINACHI,KASARAGOD. 2. AMEEN M MUHAMMED DO..DO.. BY ADV. SRI.JIMMY GEORGE SRI.VINODKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REP BY REGISTRAR KANNUR UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, MANGAD, KANNUR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CENTURY DENTAL COLLEGE,POINACHI, KASARGODE. ADV. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ....................... W.P.(C).10587/2011 ....................... Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioners have approached this Court with the following prayers:- (i). Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue to attend the 3rd year Bachelor of Dental Surgery degree course which they were attending as they have passed the 2nd year supplementary Bachelor of Dental Surgery degree examination. (ii). Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to remit the 3rd year BDS examination fees for the exams to be held shortly by the 1st respondent. (iii). Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to W.P.(C).10587/2011 2 permit the petitioners who have come out successfully in the 2nd year supplementary Bachelor of Dental Surgery Degree examination to appear in the 3rd year Bachelor of Dental Surgery degree examination. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, in the light of the observations made by this Court in Ext.P1 judgment, had sought for similar benefits by filing W.P. (C).28167/2010 seeking a direction to permit them to attend the 3rd year BDS class. That writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 13.9.2010 directing the first respondent University to consider the representation dated 2.9.2010 and the same is admittedly considered and rejected by the University, as per order dated 25.10.2010. 3. The case of the petitioners is that the second respondent College, since the representation was pending before the first respondent University, permitted the petitioners to attend the 3rd W.P.(C).10587/2011 3 year Bachelor Degree BDS from 9.9.2010 to 25.10.2010, the date of rejecting the representation under the impression that the representation would be allowed in the light of Ext.P1 judgment, but the petitioners could not attend the class any further, in view of the rejection of the representation. It is in such circumstances that, the relief has been moulded in the present writ petition pointing out that the petitioners have successfully come out the 2nd year BDS examination as evident from Ext.P2 and hence they are eligible to be permitted to remit the fees and to appear for the 3rd year examination. 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submits that no vested right is conferred upon the petitioners, including by Ext.P1 judgment, but to have the matter considered with regard to the condonation of delay as to the requisite attendance. It is also pointed out that the petitioners do not have the prescribed minimum attendance, to make them eligible for appearing in the examination. The law is also well W.P.(C).10587/2011 4 settled in view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.1342/2007 holding that such an exercise permitting the candidates like the petitioners to attend the class and participate in the examination is not permissible. Above all, even going by the admitted version of the petitioners that, on an earlier occasion, when the petitioners approached this Court seeking the benefit of Ext.P1 judgment by filing W.P.(C). 28167/2010, the matter was directed to be considered by the University and the University dismissed the application on 25.10.2010. Admittedly, the said order passed by the University has not been challenged by the petitioners. In the above circumstances, this Court finds that the matter has become final and the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. Writ petition fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge mrcs