Dismissed

Mohammed Faizal P.M. v. the Registrar

Kerala HC9 Oct 2020WA/1301/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal filed by a law aspirant challenging the Single Judge's order dismissing his petition for LL.B. admission was dismissed. The court held that the appellant, having completed regular exams in 2018-19, did not fall under the eligibility clause for candidates appearing in the 2019-20 regular examinations. The University was directed to expedite evaluation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mohammed Faizal P.M. Vs the Registrar — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶5

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶7

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 17TH ASWINA, 1942

¶8

WA.No.1301 OF 2020

¶9

¶10

APPELLANT/S:

¶11

MOHAMMED FAIZAL P.M. AGED 23 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED SAGEER, PAZHANGADI HOUSE, THURUTHIYIL LANE, EDEPPURAM, ALUVA,ERNAKULAM-683101.

¶12

BY ADVS. SMT.P.RANI DIOTHIMA SRI.S.K.HARISH

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 THE REGISTRAR MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686560.

¶15

2 THE PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM682016.

¶16

3 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, SS KOVIL ROAD, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -2-

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

S. Manikumar, C.J.

¶21

The instant writ appeal is filed challenging the judgment in W.P. (C) No. 19058 of 2020 dated 23.09.2020 whereby a learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition holding as follows:-

¶22

“7. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that as regards the 1^st petitioner, her allotment can be protected, provided she is able to produce her mark list before the next stage of counselling. However, this benefit cannot be granted to the 2^nd petitioner, since the University is unable to inform this Court whether her mark list of the supplementary examinations can be published before that date, particularly because they say that the valuation is yet to be commenced.

¶23

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition, granting liberty to the 1^st petitioner to make an appropriate application before the 1^st respondent - Registrar of the Mahatma Gandhi University, that she intends to cancel her supplementary examinations and requiring that the grace marks be allotted to her on account of her participation in the National Service Scheme and Youth Festival; and if this is done within a period of three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the

¶24

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -3-

¶25

University shall issue her an appropriate mark list for the main examinations, which she has already taken, adding the eligible grace marks, as expeditiously as is possible but not later than one week from the date on which the said application is made.

¶26

I also record the submissions of Smt. Rani Diothama that such a request has already been made by her client through E- mail and if this is true, the University shall accept the same and issue the mark list as ordered above.

¶27

The 1^st petitioner will also be, thereafter, at liberty to produce the mark list as per the directions above before the 2^nd respondent-Principal on any date prior to the last date for exercise of options for the next phase of counselling; and in such event, the 2^nd respondent shall allot her the seat based on her marks in the entrance examinations, as per law.

¶28

Finally, the respondent - University is directed to complete valuation and publication of the supplementary examinations as regards the 2^nd petitioner, as per the examination calendar and before the commencement of the next academic year.”

¶29

Short facts leading to the filing of writ petition are as follows:-

¶30

The appellant was the 2^nd petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 19058 of 2020. Both the petitioners are law aspirants and have

¶31

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -4-

¶32

successfully attempted the Entrance Examination conducted by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations, the 3^rd respondent, for three year LL.B course for the year 2020 - 2023 and were included in the rank list at serial Nos. 74 and 82 respectively. Though they had produced the final year mark list, their candidature was rejected on the ground that they have not produced their Provisional/Degree Certificate. Since the results of supplementary examination is yet to be published, the consolidated mark list or Provisional/Degree Certificate has not been issued. Hence, admission was denied for the reason that they have not qualified to be admitted since their results of supplementary examinations were not published. Appellant had appeared for the supplementary examination conducted by the Registrar, Mahatma Gandhi University, 1^st respondent in the month of April 2020 for the subjects Hindi and Evolution of Literary Movements. As per the guidelines, the results of the supplementary examinations have to be published much before the publication of final examination results, but due to Covid-19 pandemic outbreak, delay has occurred in publishing the results.

¶33

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -5-

¶34

The petitioners prayed for a direction to the 3^rd

¶35

respondent to admit the petitioners to the three year LL.B. course without production of final mark list subject to the result of their supplementary examination or in the alternative, direct the 1^st respondent to forward the result of the supplementary examinations written by the petitioners to the Principal, Government Law College, Ernakulam, the 2^nd respondent forthwith, in sealed cover and inter - alia keep vacant two seats, so as to accommodate the writ petitioners, as and when supplementary examination results are published and also to take immediate and necessary steps to see that the results of supplementary examinations appeared by the petitioners is published forthwith. Petitioners also contended that the delay in publishing the supplementary results is not of the fault of the petitioners.

¶36

The 1^st respondent University submitted that the valuation of the answer paper has not yet commenced. The 2^nd respondent contended that in view of sub-clause (c) of clause (ii), Academic of the Prospectus for admission to three year

¶37

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -6-

¶38

LL.B Course, Kerala 2020-2021 approved as per G.O.(MS) No100/2020/HED dated 3.3.2020, the appellant is not eligible to be admitted.

¶39

Before the writ court, it was contended that even without publishing the supplementary examination results, the 1^st petitioner is eligible to be awarded a degree, since she is having grace marks of 60 for her participation in N.S.S and Youth Festival. So, as required by the 1^st respondent, 1^st petitioner requested to cancel her supplementary examination and she furnished the mark list forthwith. She got admission in the Government Law College, Ernakulam on 25^th September 2020. Hence she is not a party in the instant writ appeal.

¶40

After hearing the parties, a learned Single Judge was pleased to allow the writ petition to the extent it related to the 1^st petitioner by protecting her allotment but since the 1^st respondent was unable to inform this Court, as to whether the mark list of the supplementary examination can be published before the next stage of counseling, writ court disposed the writ petition directing the 1^st respondent University to complete the

¶41

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -7-

¶42

valuation and publication of the result of the supplementary examination, as regards the appellant, as per the examination calendar and before the next academic year.

¶43

Being aggrieved, instant writ appeal is filed. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the delay in publication of the supplementary examination written by the appellant is not because of the fault of the appellant, and the delay was caused due to the 1^st respondent University. At present, the University is in full swing and all the staff are present and there is no difficulty for completing the valuation of the result of the appellant in a speedy manner, so as to enable him to be admitted to the three year LL.B course without losing one academic year.

¶44

When the matter came up on 07.10.2020, we directed Mr. Tekchand, learned Senior Government Pleader to take notice for the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Thiruvananthapuram, respondent No. 3. We also directed Mr. Ashok M. Cherian to take notice for the Registrar, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam respondent No.1.

¶45

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -8-

¶46

On this day, when the matter came up for further hearing,

¶47

inviting the attention of this Court to the notification issued by the Government of Kerala, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Thiruvananthapuram, Mr. V. Manu, Senior Government Pleader submitted that as per the notification issued for the Entrance Examinations for admission to three year LL.B. course 2020-21, the eligibility criteria for admission is that a candidate seeking admission to course should be a graduate in any faculty of any University in Kerala or of any other Universities recognized by any of the Universities in Kerala as equivalent.

¶48

Taking this Court through clause 6 (ii) (c) of the prospectus dated 03.03.2020, issued for admission to three year LL.B. course, Kerala 2020-21, learned Senior Government Pleader further submitted that candidates who are appearing / appeared for the qualifying examination (regular examination of 2019-20 academic years) are also eligible to apply for the entrance examination. Such candidates become eligible for admission only if they produce the Provisional / Degree Certificate of the qualifying examination and the mark lists of all parts of the qualifying examination at the same time.

¶49

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -9-

¶50

According to him, the appellant took up his regular three year LL.B. course examination in 2018-19. Though the appellant had an opportunity to appear for the supplementary examination in 201920, he did not take up the supplementary examination, whereas, he wrote the supplementary examination only in 2020. Learned Government Pleader further submitted that, in terms of clause 6 (ii) (c) of the prospectus, appellant is not eligible to be considered for admission to 3 year LL.B. course for the academic year 2020-21.

¶51

Mr. Ashok M. Cherian, learned Standing Counsel for the Mahatma Gandhi University, respondent No. 1 submitted that due to Covid – 19 pandemic, the process of evaluation of the answer sheets was taken up, at the end of September, 2020. According to him, there are 130 programs for which examinations have been conducted. He also submitted that priority in the matter of publication of results is given to the students who had taken up 6^th semester degree course and publication of results for the supplementary examination, for the subjects Hindi and Evolution of Literary Movements, taken up by the appellant, will take some time.

¶52

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -10-

¶53

However, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that taking into consideration the present pandemic situation, it would be appropriate to direct the 1^st respondent to publish the result of the appellant, after valuation within a time frame and provisionally admit the appellant to the three year LL.B course in Government Law College, Ernakulam, subject to the result of the supplementary examination. If the 1^st respondent further delays the publication of the result, it will cause irreparable damages to the appellant and he will lose one academic year. Appellant will not get admission to any other course also.

¶54

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. Notification issued by the Government of Kerala, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Thiruvananthapuram for admission to 3 year LL.B. course 2020, prescribed the eligibility criteria. Clause 2 (ii) which deals with the academic qualifications reads thus:

¶55

“(ii) Academic Qualifications:

¶56

(a) Candidate seeking admission to the course should be a graduate in any faculty of any University in Kerala or

¶57

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -11-

¶58

of any other Universities, recognised by any of the Universities in Kerala as equivalent thereto.

¶59

(b) A candidate who has passed the Bachelor's Degree examination with a minimum of 45% marks in aggregate (i.e., 45% marks for all the parts of the Degree Examination taken together) shall alone be eligible for admission to the 3 year LL.B course. However, candidates belonging to the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes need only 42% marks and those belonging to the Scheduled castes/Scheduled Tribes need only 40% marks in the qualifying examination. No rounding off of percentage of marks to the nearest higher integer is permitted. Applicants who have obtained first degree certificate after prosecuting studies in distance or correspondence method shall also be considered as eligible for admission. The applicants who have obtained graduation/post graduation through open universities system directly without having any basic qualification for prosecuting such studies are not eligible for admission.

¶60

(c) Candidates who are appearing/ appeared for the qualifying examination are also eligible to apply for the Entrance Examination. Such candidates become eligible for admission only if they produce the Pass Certificate and Mark List of the qualifying examination at the time of admission.”

¶61

Prospectus issued for admission to Kerala 3 year LL.B. course

¶62

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -12-

¶63

2020 amplifies the eligibility criteria for admission to 3 year LL.B. course. Clause 6 (ii) which deals with academic qualifications reads thus:-

¶64

“(11) Academic

¶65

(a) Candidate seeking admission to the course should be a graduate in any faculty of any University in Kerala or of any other Universities, recognised by any of the Universities in Kerala as equivalent thereto.

¶66

(b) A candidate who has passed the Bachelor's Degree examination with a minimum of 45% marks in aggregate (i.e., 45% marks for all the parts of the Degree Examination taken together) shall alone be eligible for admission to the 3 year LL.B course. However, candidates belonging to Socially and Educationally Backward Classes need only 42% marks and those belonging to the Scheduled castes/Scheduled Tribes need only 40% marks in the qualifying examination. No rounding off of percentage of marks to the nearest higher integer is permitted. Applicants who have obtained first degree certificate after prosecuting studies in distance or correspondence method shall also be considered as eligible for admission. The applicants who have obtained graduation/post graduation through open universities system directly without having any basic qualification for prosecuting such studies are not eligible for admission.

¶67

¶68

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -13-

¶69

qualifying examination (regular examination of 2019-20 academic years) are also eligible to apply for the Entrance Examination. Such candidates become eligible for admission only if they produce the Provisional / Degree certificate of the qualifying examination and the mark lists of all parts of the qualifying examination at the time of admission.”

¶70

A conjoint reading of the academic qualifications notified and amplified in clause 6 (ii) (c) of the prospects extracted supra explains that the appellant who had completed his regular examinations in 2018-19, would not be eligible for admission to three year LL.B. course. Clause only states about the candidates who are appearing / appeared for the qualifying examinations (regular examinations 2019-20 academic years).

¶71

In view of the prescriptions in the prospects and also of the fact that the results of the supplementary examination in the subjects Hindi and Evolution of Literary Movements undertaken by the appellant have not been published, we are of the view that there is no error in the impugned judgment. Giving due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for parties and going through the judgment in W.P. (C) No. 19058 of 2020, we are of the view that the

¶72

WA.No.1301 OF 2020 -14-

¶73

appellant has not made out a strong case for interference to the same.

¶74

In the light of the above discussion, writ appeal is dismissed. However, we hope that the Mahatma Gandhi University, respondent No. 1, completes the evaluation process of the examinations as expeditiously as possible, taking note of the plight of the students.

Sd/-

S. MANIKUMAR

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶80

Eb/12.10.2020

¶81

///TRUE COPY///

¶82

P. A. TO JUDGE

Mohammed Faizal P.M. v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mohammed Faizal P.M. v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasobh B. Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Chandar Raju Vs State of Kerala

Central Board of Secondary Education, Vs Shanu

Ragitha Vs State of Kerala

Siddique Babu I. Vs State of Kerala

The Commissioner for Entrance Examinations Vs Ananthapadmanabhan C. S.