Dismissed

University of Kerala v. Karthik S

Kerala HC8 Jun 2017WP(C)/33821/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the University of Kerala challenged the Keralas Courts order upholding a lok ayukta decision that directed the university to declare a students sixth semester result despite attendance shortages the student accepted for the fourth semester. The court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no direction to declare the 6th semester result.

University of Kerala Vs Karthik S — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/18TH JYAISHTA, 1939 WP(C).No. 33821 of 2016 (C) ----------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PALAYALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

KARTHIK S SUJATHA MANDHIRAM, PUTHENCHATTA, VARKALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-673671 2. THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, VIKAS BHAVAN PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033

¶10

THE PRINCIPAL C.H.M.M.COLLEGE OF ADVANCED STUDIES, CHAVARCODE, PALAYAMKUNNU, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695146

¶11

ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIURVANANTHAPURAM R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.V.TEKCHAND R3 BY ADV. DR.K.P.PRADEEP R3 BY ADV. SMT.T.THASMI R1 BY ADV. SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN R1 BY ADV. SMT.V.RENJU R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.ANIYAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.NIKHEL K GOPINATH R2 BY ADV. SMT.RENU. D.P., SC, LOK AYUKTA

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 33821 of 2016 (C)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER ----------	(S)' -----	EXHIBITS --------
EXT.P1	THE NO	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1/6/2016 IN COMPLAINT 1157/2015 PASSED BY THE KERALA LOKAYUKTA
EXT.P2	THE	TRUE COPY OF THE CBCS REGULATIONS, 2013
EXT.P3	THE RES	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST PONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY
EXT.P4	THE NO.	TURE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 1/9/2015 IN C 1157/2015
EXT.P5	THE 115	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/9/2016 IN C.NO. 7/2015 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY
EXT.P6	THE	TRUE COPY OF THE SYNDICATE MINUTES DATED 23/3/2016
EXT.P7	THE 115 SEM THE	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5/11/15 IN C NO. 7/2015 ALLOWING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO WRITE THE 5TH ESTER EXAMINATION, SUBJECT TO THE DECISION TAKEN BY SYNDICATE
EXT.P7(a)	THE 115 SEM THE	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4/3/2016 IN C.NO. 7/2015 ALLOWING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO WRITE THE 6TH ESTER EXAMINATION, SUBJECT TO THE DECISION TAKEN BY SYNDICATE

¶16

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

/TRUE COPY/

VPS PS TO JUDGE

NIL

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, C.J. & RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J.

¶21

W.P.(C) No.33821 OF 2016

¶22

Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2017

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Navaniti Prasad Singh, C.J.

¶25

1.By this writ petition, the University of Kerala challenges the order of the Upa Lok Ayukta dated 1.6.2016 in Complaint No.1157 of 2015, by which the Upa Lok Ayukta has virtually directed the Government to give directions to the University to condone the shortage of attendance of the student and to declare the result of the 6^th semester.

¶26

2.We have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the University and the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent/student.

¶27

3.The facts highlighted are in a very narrow compass. The 1^st respondent/student had 6 days shortage in attendance in respect of the 4^th semester. However he was not barred from appearing for the said examination, as the matter

¶28

W.P.(C) 33821/2016 2

¶29

was pending before the Syndicate for consideration. He appeared for the 5^th semester also. Thereafter, when the result of the 6^th semester were to be declared, on the ground that the 6 days shortage of attendance were beyond condonable limits, result of his 6^th semester has been cancelled.

¶30

4.Aggrieved by the same, the student approached the Upa Lok Ayukta and the Upa Lok Ayukta passed order, as noted above, in his favour. Being aggrieved, the University is before this Court.

¶31

5.Upon consideration of the facts as aforesaid, it is clear that the shortage of attendance was in respect of the 4^th semester. Notwithstanding full knowledge of the same, the student was allowed to appear for the said examination and the results were also declared. Not only that, in the 5^th semester & 6^th semester also he was allowed to appear. Therefore to cancel the result of the 6^th semester for shortage of attendance in the 4^th semester, cannot be justified.

¶32

W.P.(C) 33821/2016

¶33

¶34

6.We may hasten to add that this does not mean that the University can now cancel the result of the 4^th semester for it is too late in the day to take action in respect of that. We can only refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in

¶35

Krishnan V Kuruksetra University, Kurukshetra [AIR 1976 SC 376] wherein, under similar circumstances , the Apex Court held that once the candidate was allowed to participate in the examination, the University cannot turn around and cancel the results on the ground of shortage of attendance, if they had not taken action right in the beginning.

¶36

In that view of the matter, we find no merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶41

vps

University of Kerala v. Karthik S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

University of Kerala v. Karthik S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji.T.G Vs the Kerala Public Service Commission

The Palakkad District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs M.C.Viswambaran

Ameer Vs Union of India

Jabin K. Basheer Vs Union of India

George Varghese Vs State of Kerala

The Assistant Executive Engineer Vs K.N.Suryanarayanan