IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25488 of 2009(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- RAMESH M., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. MOHANAN A.V., ATTUMALIYIL VEEDU, K.S.MANGALAM PO., VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL, MR.N.M.MADHU. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDING, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, RAJEEV GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. MR. T.A. SHAJI, SC, MG.UTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 25488 of 2009-E ------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.V.R.K.Kaimal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass I do not deem it necessary to issue notice to or hear the second respondent. 2. The petitioner appeared for the eighth semester B.Tech Degree examination in Mechanical Engineering held in May/June, 2009 by the Mahatma Gandhi University. He failed in the paper 'Production Engineering'. The petitioner has therefore applied to the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University to revalue his answer script in the said paper. He has also applied for scrutiny of his answer script. Ext.P2 is the application for revaluation submitted by the petitioner. Ext.P3 discloses that the petitioner has paid the requisite fee of Rs.500/-. Ext.P4 is the application for scrutiny. Ext.P5 discloses that he has paid the requisite fee for scrutiny. The petitioner has passed all the other semester examinations. The petitioner has also been provisionally admitted to the M.Tech degree Course in Mechanical Industrial Engineering at College of Engineering, Thiruvananthapuram. In such W.P(C) No. 25488 of 2009-E 2 circumstances he submits that the respondents are bound to revalue the answer script and communicate the result expeditiously. He also seeks appropriate directions to the first respondent to permit him to scrutinise the answer script within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 3. Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Mahatma Gandhi University submits that petitioner's application cannot be singled 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 petitioner's application for revaluation will be considered and the answer script revalued, if the application is in order, within the aforesaid period. As regards scrutiny of the answer script, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the scrutiny can be done within ten days from the date on which a copy of this judgment is received by the Mahatma Gandhi University. 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 unless W.P(C) No. 25488 of 2009-E 3 applications for revaluation are expeditiously disposed of, it will cause serious prejudice to students. I am therefore of the considered opinion that 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 script described in Ext.P2 and to communicate the result to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall, in order to enable the respondents to act as directed above, produce a certified copy of this judgment before the Controller of Examinations, Mahatma Gandhi University. The Controller of Examinations shall, within ten days from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him, make arrangements for scrutiny of the answer script referred to in Ext.P4 application. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge //True Copy// PA to Judge ab