Disposed

Roshin T.Mulloorakam v. Cochin University of Science and Technology

Kerala HC29 Jan 2016WP(C)/898/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging answer sheet revaluation, the High Court directed the university controller to consider the petitioner's representation, offer a hearing, re-evaluate the script in her presence, and rectify any errors within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direct the third respondent to consider the representation, afford an opportunity of being heard, and re-evaluate the answer script in the petitioner's presence within two weeks.

Roshin T.Mulloorakam Vs Cochin University of Science… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/9TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 898 of 2016 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ROSHIN T.MULLOORAKAM AGED 26 YEARS DAUGHTER OF MR.M.D.THOMAS, FINAL YEAR MBBS STUDENT GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH SRI.JOSELAL GEORGE SRI.ACHUTH KYLAS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CUSAT P.O. COCHIN-682 020.

¶11

2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY , CUSAT P.O. COCHIN-682 020.

¶12

3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, CUSAT P.O. COCHIN-682 020.

¶13

R1-R3 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, SC, COCHIN UNIVERSITY

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 898 of 2016 (J)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER ALONGWTH THE SECHME OF EVALUATION FOR GENERAL MEDICINE PAPER-I FOR FINAL MBBS PART-II EXAMINATION JUNE 2015.

¶19

EXHIBIT.P1(A). TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER FOR GENERAL MEDICINE PAPER-II FOR FINAL MBBS PART-II EXAMINATION JUNE 2015.

¶20

EXHIBIT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIOENR'S ANSWERSHEET TO EXT.P1.

¶21

EXHIBIT.P2(A). TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIOENR'S ANSWERSHEET TO EXT.P1(A)

¶22

EXHIBIT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE REVLAUATION SHEETS OF EXT.P2.

¶23

EXHIBIT.P3(A). TRUE COPY OF THE REVLAUATION SHEETS OF EXT.P2.

¶24

EXHIBIT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REVLAUATION SHEETS OF EXT.P2(A)

¶25

EXHIBIT.P4(A). TRUE COPY OF THE REVLAUATION SHEETS OF EXT.P2(A)

¶26

EXHIBIT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 6/1/2016.

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

R.AV

//True Copy//

PA to Judge

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶33

W.P (C) NO.898 OF 2016

¶34

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2016

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

The petitioner alleges omissions and commissions in

¶37

the process of revaluation of her answer script. The

¶38

petitioner has in this regard submitted Ext.P5 representation to the third respondent.

¶39

I direct the third respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. The revalued answer scripts shall be verified by the third respondent in the presence of the petitioner to rectify the omissions if any.

¶40

The process as above shall be completed within a period of two weeks and remedial steps taken.

¶41

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶42

sd/-

¶43

V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE

¶44

R.AV

¶45

//True Copy//

¶46

PA to Judge

Roshin T.Mulloorakam v. Cochin University of Science and Technology

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshin T.Mulloorakam v. Cochin University of Science and Technology

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

K.V. Cheriya Vs Santhosh

V.a.Yousaf Vs State of Kerala

P.C.Asokan Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Kumari V.G. Vs Muhammed Ziyad

Alwin Easo Suresh Vs the Mahatma Gandhi University

Anoop Vs District Executive Officer