IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28858 of 2009(B) ------------------------------------ PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. SARATH BABU, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN NAIR, KOCHUPURACKAL HOUSE, THIDANADU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. LINISH MON M.S., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.M.C.LUCKOSE, MANALEPUNNAYIL HOUSE, KOLANI P.O., CHUMKOM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. BY SRI. T.A. SHAJI STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.C. No. 28858 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. E.S.M. Kabeer, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. T. A. Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University. 2. The petitioners appeared for the supplementary fourth semester B. Tech degree examination in Mechanical Engineering conducted by the Mahatma Gandhi University in May/June, 2009. The results were published in August, 2009. The first petitioner failed in one paper, namely 'Machine Tools'. The second petitioner failed in one paper, namely 'Hydraulic Machines'. The petitioners have therefore applied for revaluation of their answer scripts in the said papers by submitting Ext. P3 and P6 applications respectively. They have also paid the requisite fee it is stated. The petitioners submits that if their answer scripts are revalued they are sure to secure a pass and that unless their answer scripts are expeditiously revalued, they will be put to serious prejudice. In this writ petition the petitioners seek a writ in the nature of W.P.C. No. 28858 of 2009 2 mandamus commanding the respondents to revalue their answer scripts and to communicate the results expeditiously. 3. Sri. T. A. Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University submits that petitioners' answer scripts cannot be signed out and revalued as it will lead to loss of confidentiality. He also submits that as per the Examination Manual, the University requires 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. He further submits that the petitioners' applications for revaluation will be considered and their answer scripts revalued, if the applications are in order, within the aforesaid period. 4. The Examination Manual is not a statutory regulation. It is a Manual prepared by the University for its guidance. The stipulations in the Examination Manual cannot, in my opinion, operate to the detriment of students. A Division Bench of this Court has in University of Kerala v. Sandhya P. Pai (1991 (1) KLT 812) held that the University should hurry with applications for revaluation without wasting any time and that W.P.C. No. 28858 of 2009 3 unless applications for revaluation are expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to the students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that the University should not wait for the expiry of 81 clear days from the date of publication of the results to complete the revaluation process. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the revaluation of the answer scripts described in Exts.P3 and P6 applications and to communicate the results to the petitioners within six weeks from the date on which the petitioners produce a certified copy of this judgment before the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. ln