IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3329 of 2009(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RENJITH.K.R., S/O.K.P.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR 'SURABHI', VARANAD P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-43. 2. ARUN MATHEW, S/O.ROY MATHEW, PAKKIL P.O., KOTTAYAM-12. 3. ARUN WILLIAM, 'ANUGRAHA', POTHEN CODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-84. 4. PETER.P.VARGHESE, 'PANDIKARA' HOUSE, KANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 3. REGISTRAR, M.G.UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 4. DIRECTOR, SCHOOL OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 5. HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT (CONVENER, CASE COMMITTEE), DEPARTMENT OF BIOCHEMISTRY, GANDHINAGAR, KOTTAYAM. 6. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, M.G.UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. SHRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.3329 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners seek a direction to the respondent University to restructure the existing Master of Applied Science in Medical Biochemistry Course in accordance with Ext.P5 recommendations made by the Core Committee. 2. As at present, the course has a duration of two years. The petitioners state that in all other Universities, the course duration is three years and that at least three years period is required for teaching the curriculum. It is stated that it was taking note of this, the Core Committee made the recommendation for restructuring the course as per Ext.P5. While a decision on Ext.P5 is yet to be taken, the petitioners submit that their examination is scheduled to commence on 04/02/2009. It is in this background, the writ petition has been filed with the prayer mentioned above and with an interim prayer to direct that the examination should be rescheduled. 3. The learned standing counsel for the respondent WP(C) No.3329/2009 -2- University on instructions submit that the recommendation has been considered by the Academic Council of the University and it has been decided to restructure the course for the future. In so far as the ongoing students are concerned, the Academic Council has appointed a Core Committee and that the Core Committee will further deliberate on this issue in its next meeting. 4. As already stated, the petitioners were given admission for two year course and therefore, it is essential for the University to decide about the restructuring of the course as far as the ongoing students are concerned. Therefore, the University shall take a decision, following the deliberations in the Core Committee. 5. Although, a direction to the respondents to defer the examination now scheduled to the first week of February is sought for, I do not think this Court will be justified in issuing such a direction at this belated stage. This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing that the University shall take a final decision on the issue of restructuring of the existing course as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg