Allowed

Aparna S Anil v. the Vice Chancellor University of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Jan 2019WP(C)/8591/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner sought 5% grace marks for arts achievements per 2007 University Guidelines, but was awarded only 15 marks/year per Post-Graduate Credit and Semester Regulations. Court held differential treatment violated Article 14 and quashed rejection letter.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P8 is quashed and respondents are directed to award grace marks to the petitioner in accordance with Ext.P1 Guidelines.

Aparna S Anil Vs the Vice Chancellor University of… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 8TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.8591 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

APARNA S ANIL

¶8

AGED 22 YEARS, D/O.K.ANIL KUMAR,AMBALAKKARA HOUSE, PULAMON P.O.,KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM - 691 531.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE VICE CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 034.

¶12

2 THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,UNIVERSITY OFFICE, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 034.

¶13

3 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 034.

¶14

4 THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR CSS UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,OFFICE OF THE CREDIT AND SEMESTER SYSTEM,KARIAVATTOM - 695 104.

¶15

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

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner, a Master of Arts (M.A) Graduate in English Literature from the Institute of English, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram and an accomplished artist who had been the “Kalathilakam” at the Kerala University Youth Festival for the year 20162017, has approached this Court being aggrieved by Ext.P8. It is the petitioner’s case that, as per Ext.P1 dated 7.09.2007, the University had decided to award grace marks for students who excel in the Arts segments, such as Youth Festival, Keralolsav, Deseeyolsav etc. According to guideline No.1 in Ext.P1, “grace marks shall be awarded to both Graduate and Post Graduate Courses”. As per guideline No.2, the “maximum grace marks awarded to a student in the year for all the activities put together shall not exceed 15%”. The percentage of grace mark would depend upon the position achieved by the student in a particular competition.

¶21

2 . In accordance with the guidelines, the Director of Student Services, University of Kerala had, vide Ext.P2 letter, recommended grant of 5% grace marks for the petitioner in the University Examination March - April 2016. Similarly, 5% marks had been recommended for the University Examinations of March-April 2017 also, as evidenced by Ext.P3. It is submitted that, when the petitioner approached the

¶22

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶23

¶24

University for award of grace marks in terms of the recommendations contained in Exts.P2 and P3, she was awarded only 30 marks in total for both years, ie. at the rate of 15 marks per year, contrary to the recommendations and the guidelines.

¶25

Aggrieved by the discrimination in awarding grace marks, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 complaint, which was rejected by Ext.P5 letter, stating that the Vice Chancellor had turned down her request for awarding 5% grace marks and that as per the Credit and Semester System (CSS) Regulations for Post Graduate Programmes, the award of grace marks is limited to 15 marks per academic year and 30 marks for the whole program. Ext.P5 was subjected to challenge before this Court in W.P.(C) No.36099 of 2017, wherein this Hon’ble Court rendered Ext.P6 judgment, finding that the reason for rejecting the request of the petitioner for award of grace marks is not evident from the letter under challenge. Consequently, this Court set aside Ext.P5 and directed the competent authority in the University to take up, consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, and any further representation to be preferred by the petitioner.

¶26

In terms of the judgment, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation and the University , in purported the compliance of the direction contained in Ext.P6 judgment, issued Ext.P8 letter once again

¶27

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶28

¶29

rejecting the petitioners request pointing out that, her representation was placed in the CSS Academic Committee meeting held on 03.02.2018 chaired by the Vice Chancellor and that after detailed discussion, decision was taken not to recommend the petitioners request.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner challenges Ext.P8 letter on the ground that, in the light of Ext.P1 guidelines, the University cannot contend that students undergoing Post Graduation under the Credit and Semester Scheme, would be entitled only for lessor grace marks, than the other Post Graduate Students in the University. It is contended that such action of University amounts to patent discrimination among the students.

¶31

A detailed statement has been filed on behalf of the University, the contents of which is reiterated during arguments, by the learned Standing Counsel of the University. It is pointed out that all the Departments of the University including Institute of English has been following the Regulations of Post-Graduate programmes under the Credit and Semester System from the introduction of semester system in the Departments from 1995 onwards. It is further pointed out that, in all matters pertaining to Examinations, the Credit and Semester System has its own regulations, which was followed by the University

¶32

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶33

¶34

Departments. As per the regulations of the Post-Graduate programmes in teaching Departments, “students who participate in any event listed in schedule III shall be eligible for grace marks of 15 marks per academic year and 30 marks for the whole programme and that grace marks shall be added to the total score achieved in one or more courses of choice of the student in the whole programme placing reliance on the above mentioned regulations. It is contended that the rejection of the petitioner's request for award of grace marks at the rate of 5% per year was justified .

¶35

I find considerable force in the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner that, if different grace marks were awarded to the students within the same University, that would amount to discrimination, especially in view of Ext.P1 guidelines. In this context, it may also be relevant to note that even though the Credit and Semester System has been in vogue in the University from 1995 onwards, in Ext.P1 Guidelines, framed in the year 2007, it has specifically mentioned that grace marks shall be awarded to both Graduate and Post-Graduate Courses. That being the position, the University cannot place reliance on the Credit and Semester Regulations to contend that the maximum grace marks, that would be awarded to a student of the Post-Graduate Programme under the Credit and Semester System is 30

¶36

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶37

¶38

marks and not 5% per year, as specified in Ext.P1 Guidelines. If such an approaches adopted, that would definitely be in violation of the equality principle enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶39

In that view of the matter, I do not find any rationale for reason stated in Ext.P8 letter, by which the petitioner's request for award of grace marks in accordance with Ext.P1 Guidelines was rejected. Consequently, Ext.P8 is quashed and the respondents are directed to award grace marks to the petitioner in accordance with Ext.P1 Guidelines.

¶40

This writ petition is allowed with the above direction.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

mpm

WP(C).No. 8591 of 2018

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX

¶48

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶49

EXHIBIT P1.	A COPY OF THE NO.AD.D1.1.127 DATED 07.09.20	UNIVERSITY ORDER 6/ARTS/GRACE MARKS/2007 07.
EXHIBIT P2.	A COPY OF THE MARKS/2015-16	LETTER NO.DSS/18/GRACE DATED 12.07.2017.
EXHIBIT P3.	A COPY OF THE MARKS/2016-17	LETTER NO.DSS/18/GRACE DATED 12.07.2017.
EXHIBIT P4.	A COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY T	COMPLAINT DATED 07.10.2017 HE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5.	A COPY OF THE NO.CSS/ADMN1/1	LETTER 731/2017 DATED 20.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P6.	A COPY OF THE IN WRIT PETITI	JUDGMENT DATED 03.01.2018 ON NO.36099/2017.
EXHIBIT P7.	A COPY OF THE 09.01.2018.	REPRESENTATION DATED
EXHIBIT P8.	A COPY OF THE NO.CSS/ACAD1/2	LETTER 084/2018 DATED 15.02.2018.

¶50

//TRUE COPY//

¶51

PA TO JUDGE

Aparna S Anil v. the Vice Chancellor University of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aparna S Anil v. the Vice Chancellor University of Kerala

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

Pushpalatha E.V. Vs the Kerala Agricultural University

P.S.Indu Vs State of Kerala

Thamban K. Vs Payyannur Muncipality

Shylaja T.P. & Another Vs Mahatma Gandhi University and Another

Rinshad Abdulla Vs Sibga Institute of Advanced Studies, Rep. by Its Principal

Pushpa.S. Vs Mahatma Gandhi University and Another