Disposed

Mahatma Gandhi University v. Jesto Joy

Kerala HC4 Jan 2022WA/693/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five-mark syndicate moderation for B.Tech students could not be restricted by the University's cut-off date in these circumstances. The court dismissed the University's appeal, allowed the connected petitions and directed consideration of the petitioners' cases within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Connected petitioners' cases to be considered under the Single Judge's directions within two weeks of receipt of the judgment.

Mahatma Gandhi University Vs Jesto Joy — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -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

TUESDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 14TH POUSHA, 1943

¶8

WA NO. 693 OF 2021

¶9

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4432/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶10

KERALA

¶11

APPELLANT/S:

¶12

1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS (P.O.), KOTTAYAM-686560.

¶13

2 THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS (P.O.), KOTTAYAM-686560.

¶14

3 THE SYNDICATE, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS (P.O.), KOTTAYAM-686560.

¶15

4 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS (P.O.), KOTTAYAM-686560. BY ADV SHRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY(B/O)

¶16

RESPONDENT/S:

¶17

JESTO JOY NAMBIATTUKUDY (H), EDAVOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN-683544. BY ADVS. SIDHARTH A.MENON VASIL T.K.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).7925/2021, 16106/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -2-

¶20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶21

PRESENT

¶22

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶23

¶24

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶25

TUESDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 14TH POUSHA, 1943

¶26

WP(C) NO. 7925 OF 2021

¶27

PETITIONER/S:

¶28

SIJIN M. THARAKAN AGED 29 YEARS S/O.M.K. THARAKAN, KOCHEPPATHARAKANGUE, POOMALA P.O, PENNUKARA, CHENGANOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689520. BY ADVS. UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR) SRI.S.ANISH SRI.PRAFIN JOSEPH ZACHARIA

¶29

RESPONDENT/S:

¶30

1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYA DARSHINI HILLS P.O,KOTTAYAM - 686560.

¶31

2 SYNDICATE REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686560.

¶32

3 VICE CHANCELLOR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686560.

¶33

4 CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686560. BY ADVS. SHRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2022, ALONG WITH WA.693/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -3-

¶36

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶39

¶40

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶41

TUESDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 14TH POUSHA, 1943

¶42

WP(C) NO. 16106 OF 2021

¶43

PETITIONER/S:

¶44

1 ASWANTH RAJ C AGED 25 YEARS NEDUMPURAYIL(H), KOTTANAD.P.O, KANDANPEROOR,PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689615.

¶45

2 AKHIL B.MUTTUMPURAM, MUTTUMPURAM(H), VETTUVELLILKANAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686515. BY ADVS. SIDHARTH A.MENON VASIL T.K.

¶46

RESPONDENT/S:

¶47

1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS(PO), KOTTAYAM-686560.

¶48

2 THE REGISTRAR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS(H), KOTTAYAM-686560.

¶49

3 THE SYNDICATE ,MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS(PO), KOATTAYAM-686560.

¶50

4 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION MAHATMA GANDHI, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS(PO), KOTTAYAM-686560. BY ADV SURIN GEORGE IPE

¶51

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2022, ALONG WITH WA.693/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶52

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -4-

¶53

J U D G M E N T

¶54

Shaji P. Chaly, J.

¶55

The captioned writ appeal and the writ petitions are substantially and materially connected, and therefore we have heard them together and propose to pass this common judgment.

¶56

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 is filed by the respondents in W. P. (C) No. 4432 of 2021 challenging the judgment dated 30.03.2021, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and held that respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to be granted the benefits of moderation under the head “syndicate moderation”.

¶57

Therefore, it was also held that Ext. P12 order dated 17.05.2019 issued by the Mahatma Gandhi University for granting moderation of 5 marks to the B. Tech students, if they have only one paper remaining for pass, would apply to the petitioner, and thereupon directed the Registrar of the University to take up Ext. P13 representation of the petitioner, and dispose it of, based on the observations contained in the judgment, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶58

The brief material facts for the disposal of the writ appeal

¶59

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -5-

¶60

are as follows:-

¶61

The writ petitioner is an Engineering student, who completed the B. Tech course from Adi Shankara Institute of Engineering and Technology, affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University. According to the writ petitioner, he is aggrieved by the arbitrary action of the University, causing inordinate delay in conducting examinations and publication of results of the examinations, thereby affecting the career options and opportunities for applications to Universities, both in the country and abroad, for higher education.

¶62

It is further submitted that after the establishment of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University in 2014, most of the Engineering courses within the State of Kerala were transferred to the new Technological University, subject to the condition that the responsibility to conduct examinations and publication of results of the students, those who were already admitted to any affiliated colleges, will remain with the Mahatma Gandhi University.

¶63

In the year 2018, the last batch of Engineering students affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University completed their classes.

¶64

On 07.12.2018, Mahatma Gandhi University published a notification inviting applications from students who wish to write supplementary examinations. As per the examination schedule, the

¶65

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶66

and connected cases -6-

¶67

last exam was conducted on 11.04.2019 and the results were published on 02.07.2019. The revaluation results of the above said exams were published on 27.10.2020, with more than one year delay. Similarly, the results of examinations completed on 13.07.2019 were published only in the month of January 2020.

¶68

The writ petitioner submitted an application for revaluation of the result on 20.01.2020, and even though there is a clear stipulation under the relevant First Ordinances published that the revaluation result should be published within 60 days from the last date of application, the petitioner's revaluation result is still awaited.

¶69

In the meanwhile, Mahatma Gandhi University notified the supplementary examination for 2021 on 06.02.2021, before the revaluation result is published. As a result of the inordinate delay in conducting the examinations and publication of results, the writ petitioner and several other students were unable to decide whether they must apply for the next round of supplementary examinations or not.

¶70

Be that as it may, according to the writ petitioner, the Controller of Examinations- the 4^th appellant, pursuant to the decision of the Syndicate of the Mahatma Gandhi University- the 3^rd

¶71

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶72

and connected cases -7-

¶73

appellant, on 17.05.2019, came out with a notification stating that if any student pursuing B. Tech course under it has to pass only one paper to clear the course, he/she would be given five marks of syndicate moderation, over and above the ten marks of moderation awarded that year to all students, evident from Ext. P12.

¶74

It is the case of the writ petitioner that he was eligible for the syndicate moderation since he had just one back paper, and would have passed if five marks were granted to him, and seeking the said benefit, writ petitioner has given Ext. P13 request dated 12.02.2021; however the 3^rd appellant on 24.10.2019, decided to withdraw Ext. P12 order for granting syndicate moderation, which is produced as Ext. P14 dated 26.10.2019.

¶75

Accordingly the 2^nd appellant namely the Registrar, Mahatma Gandhi University, as per Ext. P15 order dated 27.11.2019, recalled the mark sheets and degree certificates granted to students, who had passed the course, as a result of the syndicate moderation.

¶76

The beneficiaries of moderation as per Ext. P12 have challenged Exts. P14 and P15 before this Court by filing two writ petitions, and as per Ext. P16 judgment dated 02.12.2020 in W. P. (C) No. 32960 of 2019 and a connected case, Exts. P14 and P15

¶77

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶78

and connected cases -8-

¶79

were set aside.

¶80

Thereafter, on 02.02.2021, the Controller of Examinations issued a letter clarifying Ext. P12 order granting syndicate moderation over and above the regular moderation, which according to the writ petitioner, reinstates Ext. P14 order, which was expressly set aside by this Court in Ext. P16 judgment, a copy of which is produced as Ext. P17 dated 02.02.2021.

¶81

Therefore, according to the writ petitioner, Ext. P17 is highly arbitrary and illegal, which was liable to be interfered with. It was in the above said background facts, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition partly, and directed the 2^nd respondent, i.e. the Registrar of the University, to take up Ext. P13 representation submitted by the writ petitioner, and do the necessary, within the time period, taking into account the observations made by the learned Single Judge.

¶82

It is thus challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment, the writ appeal is preferred.

¶83

The paramount contention advanced by the University and its officials are that the learned Single Judge failed to note that as per Chapter VIII clause 8.8 of the examination manual of the Mahatma Gandhi University, moderation mark is not a matter of

¶84

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶85

and connected cases -9-

¶86

right; the Board of Examiners appointed for the conduct of the University examinations may recommend award of moderation marks, if found necessary to candidates, for any one or more of the reasons given therein; granting moderation marks for a particular examination is solely the discretion of the University and the writ petitioner cannot demand the same as a matter of right; for B. Tech supplementary examinations, University is granting moderation marks as per the guidelines in the examination manual of the University and the writ petitioner cannot rely solely on the moderation marks for getting pass marks in examinations; that while directing the University to reconsider the petitioner's representation, learned Single Judge failed to see that petitioner is not similarly situated as that of the students who have secured Ext. P16 judgment specified above; that the result of the petitioner was not published with the additional moderation marks sanctioned by the Syndicate; that neither mark list nor degree certificate were issued to the petitioner to make him to be in the same footing as those B. Tech students who approached this Court challenging the recalling of mark lists and degree certificates issued to them, incorporating the additional moderation granted by the Syndicate as per Ext. P12 order dated 17.05.2019, and; that the petitioner had a backlog of five papers to clear as on 17.05.2019, and hence not

¶87

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -10-

¶88

eligible to avail the benefit of the said moderation.

¶89

It is also contended that the learned Single Judge, while holding that Ext. P12 order does not mention any cut off date, only says that if there is any student who has only one paper in B. Tech course, he/she would be granted a syndicate moderation of five marks, failed to note that moderation marks are only awarded to examinations already conducted, and are not awarded prospectively, and Ext. P12 order dated 17.05.2019 is applicable only to those examinations conducted prior to 17.05.2019, and to those students who failed in only one paper for marks less than or equal to five.

¶90

Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention advanced by the appellants is that if a student had more than one paper on the cut off date of 17.05.2019, he is not entitled to get five marks of syndicate moderation which was the intention of Ext. P12 order issued by the University.

¶91

In the writ appeal, the writ petitioner has filed a reply statement basically contending that it was with an intention of overcoming the effect of Ext. P16 judgment, the appellants have issued Ext. P17 order dated 02.02.2021 retrospectively, restricting the application of Ext. P12 order, and thereby imposing an arbitrary

¶92

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶93

and connected cases -11-

¶94

cut off date of 17.05.2019.

¶95

That apart it is contended that the contention advanced by the University that syndicate moderation of five marks granted to students under Ext. P12 notification can be availed by students who had only one paper to pass with a deficiency of a maximum of five marks as on 17.05.2019, alone are entitled to get the benefit of Ext. P12 order is not legally sustainable .

¶96

It is further contended that several of the students, who are petitioners in the writ petitions leading to Ext. P16 judgment, had more than one paper remaining as on 17.05.2019, and they were all granted with syndicate moderation evident from Annexure R1(A) produced along with the reply statement dated 06.10.2021, and further contended that syndicate moderation was granted to 118 students listed in Annexure R1(A), which was cancelled as per Ext. P15 order, however Ext. P15 order was quashed by this Court as per Ext. P16 judgment, and thereby all the students mentioned in Annexure R1(A) numbering 118 were granted with the syndicate moderation.

¶97

It is also submitted that the University has never filed any appeal against Ext. P16 judgment and therefore the Judgment has become final and conclusive.

¶98

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶99

and connected cases -12-

¶100

It is also contended that evident from Annexure R1(B) to R1(G) result sheets, several students who had more papers have secured the benefit of the syndicate moderation after the cut off date of 17.05.2019, and therefore the writ petitioner is also entitled to get the benefits secured by the students as per Ext. P16 judgment rendered by this Court as well as the benefit secured by the students as per the result sheets produced along with the statement filed by the writ petitioner.

¶101

As per the direction issued by this Court, the University has filed an affidavit dated 22.12.2021, explaining the circumstances under which the marks were awarded to the students after the cut off date of 17.05.2019, as contended by the writ petitioner, which reads as follows:-

¶102

“2. It is respectfully submitted that as regards the case of the Writ Petitioner in W.P.(c) 4432/2021, Jesto Joy (respondent in WA 693/2021) with PRN 12001018 had 5 backlogs as on 17.05.2019 (S3, S5 and S6). The candidate appeared for three papers in semester 3 and one paper in semester 6 in supplementary / Mercy Chance B.Tech Examination November 2019 and passed the 4 papers. Later in B.Tech Supplementary/ Mercy chance examination held in December, 2019 he appeared for 5 Semester Engineering Mathematics IV but failed in that paper. He applied for

¶103

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -13-

¶104

revaluation but was unsuccessful. The examination status of the paper Engineering Mathematics IV after revaluation as per memo number EJ /I/202 DATED 1/12/2021 is as follows:-

¶105

Subject	Extern	Interna	Tota	Pass/Fa
	al	l	l	il
Engineering	25	30	59	Fail
Mathematics IV

¶106

In the case of Writ petitioner in W.P.(c) 7925/2021, Sijin M Tharakan with Register No. 223049 (regular), 1011461 in 3^rd semester, the result of which was published on 02.07.2019. The candidate got only 19 marks for the said paper and he was not eligible for moderation of 5 marks awarded by the Syndicate as a onetime measure for those students who have cleared all papers except one in B.Tech Examinations as on 17.05.2019. He had applied for the revaluation for the said paper and the revaluation result was published on 06.10.2020 and he got 23 marks.

¶107

In the case of Aswanth Raj C 1^st petitioner in W.P.(c) 10106/2021 with Register No. 14011744, Branch: Mechanical Engineering student of Mount Zion College of Engineering, Kadammanitta, appeared for 22 papers and cleared 16 papers in the exam held in December 2018. He passed the remaining 6 papers in the exam held in December 2019 and passed the B.Tech Degree. As regards Akhil. B Muttumpuram (PRN 12010627) 2^nd petitioner therein was a student of Mechanical Engineering Branch in Mar Baselios Christian College of

¶108

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶109

and connected cases -14-

¶110

Engineering and Technology, Peermade. This candidate had not applied for a grant of moderation of 5 marks awarded by the Syndicate as a one time measure. The 2^nd petitioner had cleared Semester 7 only in December 2019. He cleared semesters 1 & 2 by revaluation in December 2019 examination (paperEngineering Mechanics).

¶111

It is most respectfully submitted that 5 marks moderation was granted as a one time measure to those students who had only one more paper to pass B.Tech programme with a shortfall upto 5 marks and 116 students were declared to have passed. Of these 116 students, not a single candidate has got more than 1 paper to be cleared, and was granted moderation of 5 marks. The above facts are placed before this Hon'ble Court for the just and proper disposal of the above case.”

¶112

W. P. (C) Nos. 7925 and 16106 of 2021 are filed by three students, who are situated similarly as on the cut off date of 17.05.2019, and had also more papers than one; however the contention is that going by Ext. P16 judgment of the learned Single Judge, they are also entitled to get five marks syndicate moderation, if and when they have to clear one paper, irrespective of the cut off date fixed by the University.

¶113

Therefore, the success of the writ petitioners in the writ petitions would also largely depend upon the decision taken by us in

¶114

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -15-

¶115

the writ appeal filed by the University and its officials.

¶116

We have heard, Sri. Surin George Ipe for the University and its officials, Sri. Sidharth A. Menon and Sri. Unni K. K. appeared for the writ petitioners and perused the pleadings and material on record.

¶117

Ext. P12 order passed by the University in vernacular when translated to English, reads thus:-

¶118

“ Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala Abstract

¶119

Regarding grant of syndicate moderation of 5 marks in B.Tech Examination

¶120

Examination wing I-1 Section

¶121

NO. 2085/EI/1/2019/MGU Priyadarsini Hills dated 17-052019

¶122

Ref:- Minutes of the Syndicate on 30.04.2019 No. item OA 28/ 19.03

¶123

Order

¶124

It has been resolved by the syndicate to grant 5 marks as syndicate moderation in addition to existing moderation to those students who had only one paper to be cleared in any of the semesters in B.Tech examination vide reference above.

¶125

Orders issued accordingly.

¶126

Kochurani Abraham Assistant Registrar 3 (Exams) For Controller of Examinations”

¶127

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶128

and connected cases -16-

¶129

Ext. P17 order issued by the University dated 02.02.2021,

¶130

fixing the cut off date of 17.05.2019, reads thus:-

¶131

“ Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala Abstract

¶132

B. Tech Examination – Setting aside the order cancelling syndicate moderation – complying the Judgement - Regarding

¶133

Examination wing I-1 Section

¶134

No. 706/El 1/2021MGU Priyadarsini Hills dated 02-022021

¶135

Reference (1) University Order bearing No. 2085/El 1/2019 MGU dated 17-05-2019.

¶136

(2) University order bearing No. 5207/El 1/2019 MGU dated 26-10-2019

¶137

(3) Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in W.P.(c) 32960/2019, W.P.(c) 35551/2019 dated 02-12-2020.

¶138

(4) Minutes of the Syndicate Sub Committee (Examinations) meeting held on 18-01-2021.

¶139

Order

¶140

It has been ordered to grant 5 marks as syndicate moderation in addition to existing moderation to those students who had only one paper to be cleared in any of the semesters in B.Tech examination vide reference 1 above. vide reference 2 the aforesaid decision was withdrawn and it was decided to cancel the order dated 17-05-2019.

¶141

¶142

The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala vide reference 3 judgment had set aside reference 2 order. The Syndicate Sub Committee (Examinations) meeting held on 18-01-2021 resolved to accept

¶143

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶144

and connected cases -17-

¶145

the judgment and thereby restored reference 1 order and had recommended to clarify the terms mentioned therein in the following manner.

¶146

The University Order bearing No. 2085/El 1/2019 MGU dated 17-05-2019 would be binding only to those B.Tech examinations wherein the results are published before 17-05-2019.

¶147

The University Order bearing No. 2085/EI 1/2019 MGU dated 17-05-2019 will be not applicable to those students who had failed in any one paper in shortage of 5 marks in the period prior to 17-05-2019, and those who had passed in supplementary examination before 17-052019 would not be covered by the Order bearing No. 2085/EI 1/2019 MGU dated 17-05-2019.

¶148

In the case of students who had surrendered their degree certificate as per University order bearing No. 5207/El 1/2019 MGU dated 26-10-2019 and who had passed the examination through revaluation / supplementary examination and if they demand to issue certificates with reference to the date of initial issuance of certificate, permission is accorded to issue consolidated mark list, Provisional certificate / Degree certificate granting moderation on the basis of the University order dated 17-05-2019 by cancelling consolidated mark list, Provisional certificate / Degree certificate already issued.

¶149

4 Since the University Order bearing No. 2085/EI 1/2019 MGU dated 17-05-2019 is restored on the basis of the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, the University order No. 6012/El 1/2019MGU dated 27-112019 cancelling the results of those students who had passed the B.Tech examination with syndicate moderation is to be nullified.

¶150

By virtue of powers conferred upon the Hon'ble Vice Chancellor under Section 0(1) of Chapter 3 of Mahatma

¶151

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -18-

¶152

Gandhi University Act, 1985, the above recommendations were approved. Accordingly orders issued

¶153

Bindhu N. B.

¶154

Assistant Registrar (Examination) For Controller of Examinations.”

¶155

The University has come out with Ext. P12 order to grant syndicate moderation with the intention of ensuring that the B. Tech students, who were attached to the Mahatma Gandhi University, are granted an opportunity to secure moderation and pass the examination if there is only one paper remaining to be cleared.

¶156

Admittedly, syndicate moderation was given to various students and later the said order was withdrawn, which was under challenge before this Court and the students secured Ext.P16 judgment, whereby the order issued withdrawing syndicate moderation was quashed.

¶157

It is clear that the beneficiaries of Ext. P16 judgment, irrespective of the cut off date of 17.05.2019, had secured the benefits of syndicate moderation, even if they had more papers than one to be cleared. It is also clear from the documents produced by the respondent/writ petitioner in the above writ appeal that the moderation was given to the students who had more than

¶158

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -19-

¶159

one paper on the cut off date of 17.05.2019.

¶160

Therefore, the contention advanced by the University that the moderation was given to the students, who had only one paper on the cut off date of 17.05.2019, cannot be sustained.

¶161

The learned Single Judge also found that in Ext. P12 order dated 17.05.2019, there was no cut off date fixed, but the sole requirement to secure the benefit of the said order was that the said order would be available only to students who had only one paper to clear.

¶162

Therefore, it was held that Ext. P12 order is intended to apply generally, as is clear from its tenor, and therefore could not have been confined to a class of students, which would certainly become discriminatory since difference students of the same course would come to be granted different benefits through moderation under the head 'syndicate moderation'.

¶163

The contention advanced by the learned Standing Counsel for the Mahatma Gandhi University is that no benefit was extended to any students who had more than one paper on the cut off date of 17.05.2019; however, we find that there is no rationale or reason for fixing such a cut off date. This is basically for the reason that the University has awarded the syndicate moderation to various

¶164

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶165

and connected cases -20-

¶166

students on the basis of Ext.P12 order, irrespective of any cut off date, and irrespective of any number of papers that were remaining to be cleared.

¶167

Even though on the basis of certain controversy, the University has withdrawn such orders, it was interfered with by this Court as per Ext. P16 judgment, and all the said students got the benefit of Ext. P12 order, irrespective of the number of papers remaining to be cleared.

¶168

Taking into account the said aspect, even though we are conscious of the fact that no student can claim a moderation as of right, since many students have secured the benefit of syndicate moderation on the basis of Ext. P16 judgment and on the basis of the results published by the University evident from Annexure R1(B) to Annexure R1(G) produced by the writ petitioner along with the statement filed in the captioned appeal, we do not think that the University has made out any case to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge.

¶169

Resultantly, the writ petitioners in the other two writ petitions captioned are also entitled to get the benefit of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, since they are also students similarly situated as that of the respondent/writ petitioner in W. A.

¶170

W. A. No. 693 of 2021

¶171

and connected cases -21-

¶172

No. 693 of 2021.

¶173

In that view of the matter, the writ appeal is dismissed. The captioned writ petitions are allowed and the competent authority of the Mahatma Gandhi University is directed to consider the case of the writ petitioners, in accordance with the directions of the learned Single Judge in W. P. (C) No. 4432 of 2021, at the earliest and at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. However, we make it clear that since W.A. No. 313 of 2021 filed challenging the revaluation result of the petitioner in W.P. © No. 7925 of 2021 is pending consideration before this Court, all such questions raised in the said writ petition would remain open.

¶174

Sd/-

¶175

S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE

¶176

Sd/-

¶177

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶178

¶179

///TRUE COPY/// P. A. TO JUDGE

¶180

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -22-

¶181

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7925/2021

¶182

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶183

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE THE PETITIONER.	HALL TICKET ISSUED TO
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE 2985/E11/2019/MGU	ORDER NO. DATED 17.05.2019.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE 26.10.2019 OF THE	ORDER DATED 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE 2.12.2020 IN WPC	JUDGMENT DATED NO.32960/2019.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE OF THE 1ST RESPON	ORDER DATED 2.2.2021 DENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE SEMESTER SUPPLEME	MARK LIST OF THE 3RD NTARY EXAMINATION.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION RESUL	MEMO SHOWING T OF THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE TABULATION SHEET.	ANSWER BOOK WITH
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION.	MARK SHEET OF THE 1ST
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION.	MARK SHEET IN THE 2ND
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE THE 1ST RESPONDEN	ANSWER PROVIDED BY T.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE SEMESTER B.TECH E 2019.	QUESTION PAPER OF 3RD XAMINATION JANUARY
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE THE 3RD RESPONDEN	REQUEST SUBMITTED TO T.
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE 6.3.2021 SUBMITTE RESPONDENT.	REQUEST DATED D TO THE 3RD

¶184

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -23-

¶185

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16106/2021

¶186

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶187

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/5/2019 OF THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS
Exhibit P-2A	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO GRANT HIM SYNDICATE MODERATION BY THE 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P-2B	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO GRANT HIM SYNDICATE MODERATION BY THE 2ND PETITIONER
Exhibit P-3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/10/2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-5	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 2/12/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.32690/2019 & W.P(C)NO.35551/2019
Exhibit P-6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/2/2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-7	TRUE COPY OF THE EXAM NOTIFICATION DATED 7/12/2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE SET-1 EXAM SCHEDULE PUBLISHED FOR SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION DATED 7/12/2018
Exhibit P8(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE SET-2 EXAM SCHEDULE PUBLISHED FOR SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION DATED 7/12/2018.
Exhibit P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REVALUATION NOTIFICATION FOR SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION 2018 DATED 16/7/2019
Exhibit P10	TRUE COPY OF SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION NOTIFICATION DATED 5/12/2019
Exhibit P11(A)	TRUE COPY OF SET-1 EXAMINATION SCHEDULE DATED 5/12/2019 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P11(B)	TRUE COPY OF SET-2 EXAMINATION

¶188

W. A. No. 693 of 2021 and connected cases -24-

¶189

SCHEDULE DATED 5/12/2019 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED EXAMINATION SCHEDULE DATED 10/6/2020 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT

¶190

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF SUPPLEMNTARY EXAMINATION NOTIFICATION DATED 6/2/2021.

Mahatma Gandhi University v. Jesto Joy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahatma Gandhi University v. Jesto Joy

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

Railway Board Vs M/S.Yamuna Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd.

M.B.Koyakutty Vs Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

V. Chandran Vs State of Kerala

Sijin M. Tharakan Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Aswanth Raj C Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Sreekumar v. Vs Authorized Officer/Chief Manager