necessary overall marks in respect of the VIIIth semester, but did not secure the necessary overall marks for a pass in the VIth semester. It is, therefore, that he preferred an application for redoing the internal assessment for the VIth and VIIIth semesters. It is not in dispute that the said application for redoing the internal assessment in respect of VIth and VIIIth semesters was also preferred on 23.9.2016, well within the period of one year from the date of completion of the course, as noted in the University Regulation. The request of the petitioner for redoing the internal assessments for the VIth and VIIIth semesters was, however, rejected by the University by Ext.P6 order dated 23.12.2016, notwithstanding Ext.P3 recommendation by the Government Law College, Ernakulam recommending the case of the petitioner for redoing the internal assessment for the said semesters. The petitioner, therefore, approached this court seeking for a direction to the respondent University to grant permission to the petitioner for redoing the internal assessment for the VIth and VIIIth semesters. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge, taking note of the peculiar factual circumstances, directed the University to take up the request made by the petitioner for redoing the internal assessment for the VIth semester of the BAL.LLB course, taking note of the recommendations of the Principal of the Government Law College, Ernakulam and pass orders on the same as a special case. The said orders were directed to be passed within a period of three weeks from the receipt of a copy of the judgment.
