Disposed

The Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Kajol Prakash

Kerala HC4 Oct 2021WA/980/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court heard a writ appeal by Cochin University against a single judge order mandating online supplementary examinations due to COVID-19. The Court noted that the University had already conducted remaining exams offline complying with its interim directions. Stating the matter required adjudication initially, it confirmed the interim order as absolute, disposing of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The interim order of 05.08.2021 allowing the Cochin University of Science and Technology to conduct remaining supplementary examinations in offline mode is made absolute; the writ appeal is disposed o

The Cochin University of Science and Technology Vs… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 12TH ASWINA, 1943

¶7

WA NO. 980 OF 2021

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 11530/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4:

¶10

1 THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, KALAMASSERY P.O.KOCHI-682 022.

¶11

2THE VICE CHANCELLOR
THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY,
KALAMASSERY P.O., KOCHI-682 022.

¶12

3 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, KALAMASSERY P.O., KOCHI-682 022.

¶13

4THE DIRECTOR
SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES, THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH
KALAMASSERY, KALAMASSERYP.O., KOCHI-682 022.

¶14

BY ADV SHRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, SC, COCHIN
UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

¶15

RESPONDENTS/:

¶16

1KAJOL PRAKASH
AGED 24 YEARS,D/O PRAKASHAN K.V,
KODAPULLY HOUSE, ANTHIKAD P.O.
THRISSUR-680 641.

¶17

2 ANOOJA SYED, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O SYED MOHAMMAD, VALIYAVEETIL, CHERANALLOOR, KOCHI-683 544.

¶18

¶19

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶20

3 SHARIKA J, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O SIVARAMAN, SARIKA NIVAS, ERUMAKUZHI, NOORANADU P.O.ALAPPUZHA-690 504.

¶21

4 ABHINA LALU, AGED 25 YEARS D/O LALU N., LATHALAYAM, KOTTAMKARA, CHANDHANATHOPU P.O, KOLLAM-691 014.

¶22

5SAJITHA V,
AGED 24 YEARS, D/O VARIYAPPULLY ABBAS,
VARIYAMPULLY HOUSE, MAVINCHUVARU,
PUNNAYURKULAM P.O., THRISSUR-679 561.

¶23

6 ANILA P.U, AGED 26 YEARS D/O P.D.UNNIKRISHNAN, MANNULLIL HOUSE, THIRUVANKULAM P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 305.

¶24

7 THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA, BAR COUNCIL BHAVAN, HIGH COURT ROAD, KOCHI-682 031, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶25

BY ADVS.
SRI.B.MOHANLAL
SRI.PRANOY K.KOTTARAM

¶26

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶27

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶28

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

Dated this the 4^th day of October, 2021

¶31

S.Manikumar, C.J.

¶32

After considering the pleadings and the rival submissions on 05.08.2021, we passed the following order:

¶33

“By judgment dated 28^th June 2021 in W.P.(C)No.11530/2021, writ court, after considering the rival submissions, passed the following directions:

¶34

“5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. The petitioners had sought the admission in different academic years and have availed the chance for many times are not in dispute. The only point to be considered is once the University has decided to give chance to sit in the supplementary examination for five-year LLB integrated course of odd semesters; but through off line or physical mode, is the question. During the second wave of COVID-19, which surged in the month of March 2021 and only in the month of June there had been some respite but considering the situation in Kerala, particularly in Ernakulam there are still 1500 cases everyday. The opposition by the University to insist offline and physical mode of supplementary examination in the present situation by relying upon Ext.R1(a) and (b) cannot be a justified ground considering the fact that there had been a guidelines of quarantine and RTPCR test. During the second wave all the laboratories were flooded with the test reports and patients could not get outcome of the results within a span of 24 to 48 hours. There was a pandemonium. Even the court proceedings are also held virtually, it would not be appropriate to direct that the students for sitting in the five integrated odd semester supplementary examination through offline/physical mode as insisted by the respondent university. Thus, the decision of the respondent is not sustainable and hereby set aside. The respondent university is granted forty five (45) days in rescheduling the time table for holding online supplementary examination for five year integrated odd semester, as decided earlier and declare the result as early as possible.

¶35

The writ petition stands allowed in terms of aforementioned observations.”

¶36

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶37

¶38

Instant writ appeal is filed by the Cochin University of Science and Technology and others/respondents 1 to 4 in writ petition challenging the abovesaid directions of the writ court, inter alia, on the following grounds:

¶39

“C) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of decisions has held that the Courts should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held that the Courts should not embarrass academic authorities by themselves taking over their functions. The conduct of examinations is purely an academic matter. The University and its authorities are the best ones to take decisions as to how the examinations are to be conducted. The learned Single Judge grossly erred in issuing directions to the University with respect to the manner in which the examinations have to be conducted.

¶40

D) The learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the fact that the University has already conducted and completed the examinations of the VIIth and IXth semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.b(Hons) through offline mode and the examinations of the IIIrd and Vth semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.b (Hons) though started in offline mode could not be completed only due to the lockdown imposed by the State Government and the University was forced to postpone the remaining examinations. In fact, in the IIIrd and Vth semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.B(Hons), only the examinations of few papers are pending. Out of the total 6 papers in the IIIrd semester, examinations for only three papers viz. Constitutional Law II, Law of Crimes-I and Jurisprudence (Legal Method, Indian Legal System and Basic Theory of Law) only are pending. Likewise out of the total 6 papers in the Vth Semester Examinations for only three papers viz. Family Law II, Consumer Protection Law and Law of Evidence only are pending. Examinations for the other papers in the IIIrd and Vth Semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.B (Hons) are already over in the offline mode. If the impugned judgment is implemented there will be two modes of examinations conducted for a single semester. The learned Single Judge failed to appreciate this aspect while passing the impugned judgment.

¶41

G) The learned Single Judge ought to have found that the University has taken necessary safeguards for conducting the

¶42

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶43

¶44

Examinations in the offline mode. Exts.P3 and P4 guidelines have been issued by the University in view of the COVID-19 pandemic and the examinations are being conducted strictly adhering to the said said guidelines. The Controller of Examinations as per order No.CE/General/2011(Vol.III) dated 23.12.2020 has issued Covid-19 Health Advisory for conducting University Examinations for Students and Centres by which guidelines have been issued in conducting the examinations. Moreover, the University Grants Commission has granted permission to all the Universities in India to conduct examinations in online mode or through hybrid systems as fixed by the concerned Universities. It was considering the above factors that this Hon'ble Court by Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) judgments permitted the University to conduct examinations in The offline mode/hybrid system as desired by the University. The learned Single Judge failed to appreciate Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) judgments of this Hon'ble Court which were issued after this context, a true copy of the order No.CE/General/2011(Vol.III) dated 23.12.2020 of the Controller of Examinations of the University is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-II for easy reference.

¶45

H) The University is of the firm view that, wherever possible, examinations have to be conducted in the traditional mode i.e. in the offline mode. In the online mode examination the number of students and number of questions in the question papers must have to be limited. Many of the students registered for supplementary examinations do not have backlog in all papers. Therefore, there are practical difficulties in conducting the supplementary examinations in online mode. The setting of question papers as per the Syllabus and the valuation of answer papers etc. are more easy and at the same time are of high standard, as far as the traditional system of class room examinations is concerned. In Online mode, only Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) type exams are successful. Moreover, University noticed wide spread malpractices including impersonation in online mode exam. To partially overcome this, the University has introduced a system of compulsory viva at the end of each exam for all participants. This viva system can be effectively practised only if the students are personally known to the Invigilator. This is not practical as far as the supplementary students are concerned since many of them are course out/semester out students who may not be known to the Invigilator. The learned Single Judge did not appreciate the above practical difficulties and the reasons cited by the University in its counter affidavit while passing the impugned judgment.”

¶46

Mr.S.P.Aravindakshan Pillai, learned Standing Counsel for the appellants/Cochin University of Science and Technology submitted that the writ petitioners are appearing for the supplementary examinations

¶47

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶48

¶49

and they got enough chances to clear their backlog papers in all the semesters. None of the regular students are before this Hon'ble Court. According to him, the University is of the firm view that wherever possible, examinations have to be conducted in the traditional mode i.e., in the offline mode. Moreover, there are practical difficulties in conducting the supplementary examinations in online mode.

¶50

Learned Standing Counsel further submitted that 70 students only have to take part in the supplementary examinations for IIIrd and Vth semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.b (Hons) Five Year Integrated LLB Course. He further submitted that without taking note of the steps taken by the University, reflected in Annexure A1 i.e., true copy of the notice dated 29.6.2021 of the Director, School of Legal Studies, writ court has directed the examinations to be conducted by online mode. He further submitted that without giving due consideration to Ext.R1(a) and R1(b), judgments of this court, the impugned judgment has been passed by the writ court.

¶51

That apart, learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that the respondents have already completed the course period and left the college, a few years back. Therefore, if online examination has to be conducted for the students, who have left the college on completion of the period of course/study, there is difficulty in identifying those students. For the abovesaid reasons, the learned Standing Counsel prays for an interim direction to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned judgment dated 28.6.2021 in W.P. (C)No.11530/2021.

¶52

Per contra, Mr.B.Mohanlal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners (6 in no.), submitted that acting on the directions contained in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.17444/20 (Ext.P7), the University had already conducted main/supplementary examinations of the LLB five year course through online mode and that the present set of students/writ petitioners alone should not be discriminated. According to him, University had already complied with the directions issued in Ext.P7 judgment in W.P.(C)No.17444/20 dated 1^st October 2020. He further submitted that COVID 19 cases are on the increase and as one of the writ petitioners being pregnant, there would be undue hardship in

¶53

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶54

¶55

directing the respondents to undergo the remaining examinations off line.

¶56

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶57

It is an admitted fact that three examinations in each of the semester have already been conducted offline. Considering the number of students to take up the supplementary examinations for the IIIrd and Vth semesters of BBA/B.Com LL.b (Hons) Five Year Integrated LLB Course, stated to be 70, and having regard to the arrangements made in Annexure A1, true copy of the notice dated 29.6.2021 of the Director, School of Legal Studies and the reasons stated supra, we are of the view that the University should be permitted to conduct the remaining examinations offline. Giving due consideration to the rival submissions, we are of the view that matter requires adjudication.

¶58

Writ appeal is admitted. There shall be an interim stay of the operation and implementation of the impugned judgment dated 28^th June 2021 in W.P.(C)No.11530/2021.

¶59

At this juncture, Mr.B.Mohanlal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners submitted that students are willing to take up the examinations, at the earliest.

¶60

Placing on record the above submission, Cochin University of Science and Technology is directed to explore the possibility of conducting the University examination for the remaining subjects, at the earliest.”

¶61

On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.Peter Jose Christo, learned counsel representing Adv.S.P. Aravindakshan Pillay, appearing for the appellants, submitted that pursuant to the directions of this court, a notification was issued for conducting examination for the remaining subjects in the offline mode. He further submitted that in view of the above,

¶62

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶63

¶64

making the interim order dated 05.08.2021 as absolute, writ petition can be disposed of.

¶65

However, Mr.B.Mohanlal, learned counsel, appearing for

¶66

respondents 1 to 6 submitted that the manner in which examination for the remaining subjects has been conducted is contrary to the stand of the University.

¶67

Be that as it may, inasmuch as the examination for the remaining subjects has already been conducted, as rightly pointed out, interim order dated 5.8.2021 is made absolute. Instant writ appeal is, therefore, disposed of confirming the interim order dated 05.08.2021.

¶68

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

S.Manikumar Chief Justice

Sd/-

Shaji P.Chaly

Judge

vpv

W.A.No.980 of 2021

¶76

¶77

APPENDIX

¶78

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶79

Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.6.2021
OF THE DIRECTOR, SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES.
Annexure 11TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
CE/GENERAL/2011(VOL.III) DATED 23.12.2020
OF THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS OF THE
UNIVERSITY

¶80

TRUE COPY

¶81

P.A. TO JUDGE

The Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Kajol Prakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Kajol Prakash

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

B.Sudharma Vs State of Kerala

Sheeja.T.R., Vs the Chairman Srisankara Dental College

State of Kerala Vs Bindhu

Western Ghats Protection Council, Vs Union of India

Rajesh N.C. Vs Sivaraman

Aboobacker Siddik Chappan Vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (Kerala Bank)