IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 15474 of 2009(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- S.J. SEEMA, SEEMASREE, PLACODE, MITHIRMALA.P.O, TRIVANDRUM - 695 610. BY ADV. MR.S.MOHANDAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM - 695 007, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, KERALA UNIVERSITY, TRIVANDRUM - 695 007. BY MR.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.15474/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE MARK SHEET DT. 9.12.08 ISSUED BY KERALA UNIVERSITY. P2:- COPY OF THE MARK SHEET DT. 19.4.08 ISSUED BY KERALA UNIVERSITY. P3:- COPY OF THE MARK SHEET DT. 29.10.08 ISSUED BY KERALA UNIVERSITY. P4:- COPY OF THE MARK SHEET DT. 22.5.07 ISSUED BY KERALA UNIVERSITY. P5:- COPY OF THE REPRN. DT. 21.4.09 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P6:- COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT DT. 29.5.09 APPEARED IN HINDU DAILY NEWS PAPER. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).15474/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner who was a student of the M.Sc (Analytical Chemistry) appeared for the 2nd semester examination in June, 2008. According to her, she was awarded only 5.5 marks in the written examination out of 75 marks. She sought for revaluation. There was delay in the results being published and hence the writ petition. 2. A detailed interim order was passed by this Court on 11.6.2009, which reads as follows:- “Learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that petitioner's complaint received the attention of the Vice Chancellor who ordered an enquiry and it was found that there was a mistake in the valuation of papers. Petitioner's papers have been valued under the new scheme, though he had been admitted under the old scheme. This happened because of the Original Petition filed by other students. On realizing the mistake, corrective measures W.P.(C).15474/2009 2 have been taken and the results will be communicated to the petitioner.” 3. Now it is reported by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner's papers had been revalued and it is found that the petitioner is eligible for 44.5 marks. Obviously such marks will have to be awarded to the petitioner and results have to be communicated to the petitioner. 4. Mr.Mohandas, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been found eligible on revaluation and this shows grave inadequacy on the part of the respondents. He therefore, prays for exemplary costs. In my view, it is open to the petitioner to file a Suit for damages, if so advised. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to do so, writ petition is disposed of. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs