IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2009 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 10367 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUNU.C.S, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. CHRISTUDAS, RESIDING AT SUNU BHAVAN, CHAUVARA, CHAUVARA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, UNIVERSITY. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NEYYATINKARA. BY SRI. M. RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Petitioners Exhibits: Ext.P1: True copy of the mark list dated 12.5.2008 for the 1st semester examination conducted by the 4th respondent. Ext.P2: True copy of the mark list for the 2nd semester examination conducted by the 1st respondent. Ext.P3: True copy of 3rd semester examinations conducted by the 4th respondent Ext.P4: True copy of the 4th semester examination conducted by the 1st respondent Ext.P5: True copy of the 5th semester examinations conducted by the 4th respondent Ext.P6: True copy of the 6th semester examination conducted by the 1st respondent Ext.P7: True copy of the application dated 3.11.2008 submitted by petitioner for provisional certificate regarding his B.B.A couse. Ext.P7(a): True copy of the written letter submitted before the 2nd respondent by the petitioner dated 3.11.2008 Ext.P8: True copy of the receipt for payment of fee for application Ext.P9: True copy of the statement of fact filed by the 2nd respondent before Lok Ayukta. Ext.P10: True copy of the letter sent to the 3rd respondent by the 4th respondent, dated 5.7.2008 Ext.P11: True copy of the representation dated 16.3.2009 submitted by petitioner before the 2nd respondent. /True copy/ P.A. To Judge V.GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No.10367 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner completed his BBA Course from the University Institute of Technology, Neyyattinkara. He prosecuted the course during 2006-08. He is now studying for second semester MBA in college affiliated to Kerala University. 2. As per the regulations applicable for the BBA course, the first, third and fifth semester examinations are to be conducted by the concerned college namely the 4th respondent herein. And the 2nd, 4th and 6th semester are to be conducted by the first respondent University. It has now come out that the college had awarded one mark moderation to the petitioner for one of the papers in the 1st semester and the 3rd semesters. Ext.p1 and P3 are the mark list for 1st and 3rd semester. It seems that originally in the mark list for the said semesters as issued by the college, the marks for the written WPC.No.10367 OF 2009 : 2 : examination in the subjects, Business Environment forming part of the first semester and Management Accounting forming part of the 3rd semester was one less than the minimum requirement for a pass in the said examination. According to the University, the Principal of the 4th respondent had originally forwarded a mark list relating to the petitioner showing him as having failed in the said two papers. But later one mark each for the aforementioned subjects was awarded by the Principal and accordingly revised mark lists, Ext.P1 and P3 were forwarded to the University. Petitioner completed his BBA course and is prosecuting his MBA course as already mentioned. But now the petitioner has been required by the 3rd respondent to again write his examination for issuing the Professional degree Certificate. This is challenged in the writ petition. A statement has been filed by the University and a counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent affirms that one mark was granted by the then Principal to the petitioner for one subject each in the first and third semester. WPC.No.10367 OF 2009 : 3 : 3. The University has taken a stand that moderation if at all, should have been shown by the Principal only before the mark list was originally drawn up and communicated to the University. The regulations governing award of moderation marks in University examinations are referred to in this regard. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the award of one mark in one of the papers in 1stand 3rd semester was within the competence and jurisdiction of the college. This is what was done in the present case. To require the petitioner to ignore as it were the prosecution of one year MBA and then to write the 1st and 3rd semester of BBA again will be highly prejudicial to the petitioner and will cause him unnecessary hardship, it is contended. 5. I take note of the fact that even the University has no case that the principal of the college was incompetent to award any moderation, though it is contended by them that there is no separate permissive provision in this regard. In the circumstances the award of one mark of moderation by 4th WPC.No.10367 OF 2009 : 4 : respondent to the petitioner, cannot be branded as illegal. The irregularity in the award of one mark in moderation seems to be that it was done only after the mark list was originally issued and communicated to the University. This, in my view, will not make the award of marks in moderation as completely without jurisdiction. 6. On an overall consideration of the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the interests of justice would be met if the petitioner is required by the University to again write the examination for the papers where moderation was granted, i.e. for the papers Business Environment forming part of the first semester and Management Accounting forming part of the 3rd semester. If he secures the requisite minimum marks for the said papers in semesters 1 and 3 he will be treated as having secured such marks in the 1st and 3rd semester examination which he had appeared in January 2006 and January 2007 respectively. Consequently the mark lists already issued as per Ext.P1 and P3 shall be treated as regular. If the petitioner fails to secure the WPC.No.10367 OF 2009 : 5 : minimum marks required for the said subjects in the examination which he is to attend pursuant to the order of this court, then he shall be deemed to have failed in the 1st and 3rd semester examination of the BBA course. Consequently the professional admission to the MBA course effected in the year 2008 will stand cancelled and the petitioner will be at liberty to regularize his 1st and 3rd semester examination as per the University regulations. 7. Interim order passed by this court shall continue to be operative till the petitioner participates in the 1st and 3rd semester examinations in the BBA as directed herein and till the results thereof are declared. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) jma