IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 7TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25903 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. K.V.ATHUL GANESH, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.K.V.GANESAN,”SREEGAL”, AUP SCHOOL ROAD, MALAPARAMBA PO, CALICUT 673 009. 2. JINSHAMOL.K.K, AGED 21 YEARS, D/O.MOHANAN.M.K,'SREEMANDIRAM', NAMBONATHIL HOUSE,PAYAMBRA PO,KUNNAMANGALAM (VIA) CALICUT 673 571. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 673 635. 2. THE REGISTRAR UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 673635 BY ADV. SRI SANTHOSH MATHEW, SC. FOR UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C)NO.25903/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : P1 COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 01-09-2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1st PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1st RESPONDENT FOR RE-VALUATION OF ANSWER PAPER- INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES. P1(a) COPY OF CHALA RECEIPT DATED 01-09-2011 RELATING TO THE PAYMENT OF FEE FOR RE-VALUATIO OF ANSWER SCRIPT ISSUED BY 1st PETITIONER TO 1st RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY P2 COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 01-09-2011 SUBMITED BY THE 2nd PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1st RESPONDENT FOR RE-VALUATION OF ANSWER PAPER- INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES P2(a) PHOTOCOPY OF CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 01-09-2011 RELATING TO THE PAYMENT OF FEE FOR RE-VALUATION OF ANSWER SCRIPT ISSUED BY 2nd PETITIONER TO 1st RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE MM ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).25903/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 29th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT 1.Petitioners applied for revaluation of the failed answer scripts in the 8th semester B.Tech Examination vide Exts.P1 and P2 and approached this Court complaining of delay and seeking orders to expedite the revaluation process. 2.I heard the Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 3.Having regard to the above, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to complete the revaluation sought for by the petitioners within eight weeks of production of a copy of the judgment, provided the applications for revaluation have been received and are otherwise in order. 4.Petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment before the respondents for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs