IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 25498 of 2011(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ROHIT ABRAHAM, JOHN, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. DR. SANTHOSH JOHN ABRAHAM, CHENNATTU RIVIERA, NICE GARDENS, P.J.ANTONY GROUND ROAD, PACHALAM, COCHIN-12. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMARAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY THRIKKAKARA, COCHIN-682022. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, THRIKKAKARA, COCHIN-682022. ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.25498/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF MARKS OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE VIII SEMESTER EXAMINATION. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 21952 OF 2011. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ANSWER SHEET ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PAPER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DETAILED MARK SHEET OF ORIGINAL VALUATION OF THE PAPER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DETAILED MARK SHEET OF RE-VALUATION OF THE PAPER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER FOR THE PAPER COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS FOR THE VIII SEMESTER EXAMINATION, APRIL, 2011. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.IX(I) AS SEEN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.IX(II) AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.I(E) AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.V(B) AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P15 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P16 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.VII AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P17 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P18 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.I(C) AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. WPC NO.25498/11 -2- EXT.P19 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P20 TRUE COPYOF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.I(D) AS SEEN IN THE ANSWER SHEET. EXT.P21 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PRESCRIBED BOOK. EXT.P22 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL SELECTION LIST OF WIPRO INFOTECH. EXT.P23 TRUE COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION OF PLACEMENT OFFERS OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P24 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P25 ANSWER KEY FOR THE SUBJECT COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS EXT.P26 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14.10.11 SENT BY THE RESPONDENTS //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 25498 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a student of B.Tech Degree course in the discipline of Electronics and Communication Engineering, in the Toch-H Institute of Science and Technology, which is recognised by the Cochin University of Science and Technology. The 8th semester results were announced on 10/6/11. In the subject “Communication Systems”, he could secure only 64 marks. He applied for revaluation and there was no change in the marks. Thereupon he made an application under the Right to Information Act and obtained the mark sheets and found that some of the answers were not valued and that the other answers were not valued properly. He made a request for a further valuation by an outside expert. There was no response and that led the petitioner to file this writ petition. 2. On 12/10/11, it was submitted on behalf of the University that a subject expert has been appointed for the purpose of making a report on the allegations made by the petitioner. It is now submitted by the standing counsel for the WPC No. 25498/11 :2 : University that remarks were called for from the examiners and the reports also have been received and Ext.P26 reply has been given. This communication is dated 14/10/11 and it reads as follows:- “In inviting attention to the reference cited, I am to inform you that your answer script and the representation were examined by an Expert appointed by the University. The Expert reported that the valuation of answer scripts by the two Examiners is found to be correct and there is no valid reason to take any further action based on your complaint. It is also reported that due to the poor hand writing, it is very difficult to read the answers written by you. Based on the recommendation of the Expert the file is closed without any further action.” 3. In the matter of valuation and revaluation, this Court can only go by the Regulations of the University and there is no power whatsoever, to either appoint an external expert or to send the answer paper for valuation by an outside agency. In this case, valuation and revaluation has been done and a further verification also has been done, which does not show any improvement in the position of the petitioner. It is also stated in Ext.P26 that due to poor handwriting of the petitioner, it is very difficult to read the answers written by him. This conclusion in Ext.P26 is fully substantiated by a perusal of Ext.P4, the answer paper obtained by the petitioner under the Right to Information WPC No. 25498/11 :3 : Act. 4. In such circumstances, I do not think that the petitioner has made out any case for interference by this Court. Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge