Dismissed

Asha Rahim v. Kerala University of Health and Allied Sciences

Kerala HC23 Aug 2016WP(C)/10177/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directive to allow participation in final MBBS examination despite insufficient attendance in Obstetrics and Gynecology theory. Court held petitioner ineligible as deficiency was due to class absence, not fee payment, finding no ground for relief.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner’s writ petition for directive to allow examination was dismissed.

Asha Rahim Vs Kerala University of Health and Allied… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2016/1ST BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 10177 of 2016 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ASHA RAHIM, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT SHIYA HOUSE, KOMALLOOR. P.O., CHUNAKARA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-690 505.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE VICE, CHANCELLOR, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH AND ALLIED SCIENCES (KUHAS), GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRICHUR, PIN-680 009.

¶11

2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH AND ALLIED SCIENCES (KUHAS), GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRICHUR, PIN-680 009.

¶12

3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, COCHIN-682 022.

¶13

4. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, TRIVANDRUM-695 001.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC. R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

WP(C).No. 10177 of 2016 (V)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶20

P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 03-03-2016 SHOWING PAYMENT OF LAST SEMESTER EXAMINATION FEE OF RS.4,480/-

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶26

------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10177 of 2016

¶27

Dated this the 23^rd day of August, 2016

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the final semester examination of MBBS, which was scheduled to be held on 1.4.2016. Even according to the petitioner, she did not have the requisite attendance for the subject 'Obstetrics and Gynecology theory'. Petitioner however submits that due to financial constraints, petitioner could not pay the fee in time and therefore, her attendance was not marked during JuneJuly, 2015, even though she was allowed to attend the class. As per the attendance register, there is shortage of attendance for the above subject alone, whereas she has requisite attendance for other subjects including practical. Though she remitted the examination fee, she was informed that she will not be permitted to attend the examination and therefore, she

¶30

W.P.(C) No. 10177 of 2016

¶31

-2-

¶32

had approached this Court.

¶33

By an interim order dated 17.3.2016, the petitioner was provisionally permitted to participate in the final semester examination scheduled to be commenced on 1.4.2016. However, it was made clear that the same was subject to the result of the writ petition.

¶34

Counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent Principal of the College inter alia stating that the petitioner has cleared her first year examination on third attempt and second year examination on 2^nd attempt. She completed her postings along with 2011 (2010 batch) admission students thereby lagging behind her contemporary batch by one year. Theory classes of 'Obstetrics and Gynecology' subject for MBBS started from 6^th Semester onwards. 'Obstetrics and Gynecology theory classes of the petitioner started from 30.4.2014 and finishes only by January, 2016. It is stated that there was ample time to make up for deficiency of attendance. It is further submitted that the

¶35

W.P.(C) No. 10177 of 2016

¶36

-3-

¶37

attendance for a particular subject is calculated for the entire course period. During the period of June-July 2015, she has attended the classes and attendance has been given to all the classes she attended. The petitioner has not been barred from attending classes during that period and attendance percentage of that time period was also considered for calculating the final attendance. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that attendance loss was on account of nonpayment of fee was denied. It is further stated that as far as 'Obstetrics and Gynecology' theory classes are concerned, the student should have total 300 hours, of which, the petitioner attended only 192 hours of theory classes, which is 64%. The attendance register also indicates that she was given attendance for the classes she has already attended.

¶38

It is further submitted that as per the University notification for Final MBBS Part II, a student who secured 80% attendance in a particular subject alone was eligible for appearing in the examination. The petitioner having secured

¶39

W.P.(C) No. 10177 of 2016

¶40

-4-

¶41

only 64% attendance for the particular subject, was not eligible.

¶42

Insofar as it is clearly indicated by the third respondent that the shortage of attendance was not on account of default in payment of fee, I do not think that the contentions urged by the petitioner can be sustained.

¶43

Learned counsel appearing for the University however submits that the attendance is purely a matter to be considered by the Principal of the College and if at all there is any grievance regarding the view taken by the Principal, there is a Board of Adjudication of Students Grievance Cell in the University and it shall be open for the petitioner to approach the said authority, if at all there is a genuine grievance in the matter.

¶44

Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled for any relief. However, it shall be open for the petitioner to approach the authority mentioned above, if at all she has any grievance regarding the

¶45

W.P.(C) No. 10177 of 2016

¶46

-5-

¶47

action taken by the Principal in this regard.

¶48

With the above observation, this writ petition is

dismissed.

Sd/-

A.M. SHAFFIQUE

JUDGE

Scl/23.08.2016

Asha Rahim v. Kerala University of Health and Allied Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asha Rahim v. Kerala University of Health and Allied Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.a.Unnikrishnan Vs the Dist. Collector & 4 Ors.

Sunny Mathew Vs Additional District Magistrate, Idukki

Kerala State Rice Mills Owners Vs Kseb

Kamalamma Vs the Authorized Officer (Chief Manager)

The Paravoor Ksheerolpadaka Sahakarana Sangham Ltd., Vs the Kearla State Electricity Board Represented by Its Secretary

M/S Central Advertising Agency Kottayam Vs Union of India and Others