IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2009 / 26TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 12181 of 2008(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SMITHA RAJ A.J., REVATHI, SABARI NAGAR, CHEMPAZHANTHY (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA, LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, VIKAS BHAVAN (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE FOR R1 SRI.JAJU BABU, SC FOR LOK AYUKTA FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.12181/2008 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF COMPLAINT NO.2230/2007 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE KERALA LOK AYUKTA. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 10/12/2007 OF THE HON'BLE KERALA LOK AYUKTA IN COMPLAINT NO.2230/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.18680/07. EXT.P4: COPY OF WRIT PETITION WP(C) NO.18680/07. EXT.P5: COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA EXHIBIT P1 COMPLAINT. EXT.P6: COPY OF REVALUATION GUIDELINES. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 12181 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT The University approached this court seeking to quash Exhibit P2 order passed by the Lok Ayukta, directing the Vice Chancellor to take a decision in the case of petitioner, for revaluation of her answer papers, in the manner as directed in Exhibit P3 Judgment rendered by this court in WP(C) No.18680/2007. A reading of Exhibit P2 shows that relief has been granted by the Lok Ayukta fully following Exhibit P3 Judgment. However, a perusal of Exhibit P3 judgment itself would show that it was rendered in the peculiar facts of the case highlighted in the paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment itself. The Lok Ayuktha has followed Exhibit P3 judgment, without appreciating the factual difference and ordered revaluation, ignoring the fact that there is no regulation of the University for revaluation of answer papers. Therefore, Exhibit P2 is quashed and writ petition is allowed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm