IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2009 / 29TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 20373 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.NIRANJAN, AGED 25, S/O. N.CHANDRASEKHARAN, HOSTEL ROOM D.33, IIM-K CAMPUS, KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, 673 570. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, KOZHIKODE, KERALA 673 570. 2. THE PGP CHAIRPERSON, INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, KOZHIKODE , KERALA, 673 570. 3. UNION OF INDIA REP.BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES & DEVELOPMENT SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. BY SRI MOHAN PULIKAL, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2009, THE COURT ON 20/07/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 20373 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th July,2009 J U D G M E N T Issue raised in this writ petition is covered by a judgment of this Court in which similar issue has been considered ,as evidenced by Ext.P17. 2. I heard learned standing counsel for respondents Mr.Mohan Pulikkal also in this regard. 3. I am told that Ext.P17 judgment has become final. Issue relates to the decision taken by the respondents declining permission to the petitioner to repeat the first year course of the Post Graduate Diploma in Management Programme apparently because the petitioner has not secured the requisite grades in terms of Ext.P9. 4. I have considered this issue in Ext.P17 where I have held that normally a student should be given an option to repeat the first year or the 2nd year as the case may be. W.P ( C) No. 20373 of 2009 2 5. The facts in the present case are similar to the one considered in Ext.P17 judgment and the action taken by the respondents therein is also similar. 6. In the result, Exts.P9 and P11 are set aside. Respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to repeat the first year Post Graduate Diploma in Management Programme. If the petitioner has paid the fee for the 3rd semester but the same was not utilized because of the intervening direction issued by the respondents, he shall be permitted to adjust the said fee against the fees payable for the 1st year which he is now called upon to repeat. He shall be called upon to pay only the difference in the fee. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 20373 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 20373 of 2009 4