Disposed

Minna Elizabeth v. Calicut University

Kerala HC24 Jul 2023WP(C)/20256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a final-year Architecture student, failed to complete her course as she could not pass Structural Design-I due to low internal marks despite multiple exam attempts. Court granted liberty to file a detailed representation seeking moderation or re-examination, directing authorities to dispose of it within a month considering her overall performance.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file additional representation for moderation or re-examination; direction to respondents to dispose of application within one month.

Minna Elizabeth Vs Calicut University — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.20256 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MINNA ELIZABETH, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.ANIL JOSE,
THARAKAN HOUSE, KOTTAPADI, THRISSUR – 680 505
BY ADVS.
C.K.RAPHEEQUE
SHINOJ.K.N
K.B.NIDHINKUMAR
M.RAMESH CHANDER (SR.)(R-284)

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1CALICUT UNIVERSITY,
REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, TIRUR-CALICUT ROAD,
THENHIPALAM, KERALA, PIN – 673 635
2THE PRINCIPAL,
AVANI INSTITUTE OF DESIGN, 5/2759-C,
MINI BYPASS RD, PUTHIYARA, KALIPOIKA,
KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN – 673 004
BY ADVS.
V.HARISH - FOR R2
RAJAN VISHNURAJ(K/653/2010)
P.C SASIDHARAN, SC FOR R1

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

¶12

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

(Dated: 24^th July, 2023)

¶15

The petitioner is a Bachelor of Architecture student who

¶16

completed her 5-year course from the 2^nd respondent/Avani

¶17

Institute of Design, Calicut, Kerala. The petitioner completed all 10

¶18

semesters and attended all the internal and external examinations. She has passed all subjects except Structural DesignI, which is a subject in the 5^th semester. The marks scored by the petitioner are 13 out of 50 in the internals and 43 out of 100 in the externals. The subject consists of 50 marks in internals and 100 marks in the external examinations. The petitioner attempted the external examination thrice, and her marks consisted of 26 out of 100 (1^st attempt), 40 out of 100 (2^nd attempt), and 43 out of 100 (3^rd attempt). Despite scoring up to 43 marks in the external exams, she could not clear the exam due to the low internal marks given by the

¶19

¶20

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶21

college. Pointing out this, she has filed a representation before the

¶22

1^st respondent, marked as Ext.P12, seeking to grant 20 marks as

¶23

moderation or to allow her to attend the internal examination once

¶24

again.

¶25

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1^st

¶26

respondent, in which it is submitted that the petitioner has made

¶27

four attempts in the subject, but still needs to secure the minimum

¶28

marks to pass the examination. The internal marks are awarded to

¶29

the students only on the basis of the student’s performance in assignments/seminars/viva-voce including their attendance in class. The candidate needs to secure high marks in the internals by performing well during college studies. The petitioner could secure

¶30

only 13 marks in the internal examination.

¶31

It is also contended that since the internal marks have to

¶32

be secured from the college during the course of study, and the

¶33

petitioner failed to obtain the internal marks, the only option

¶34

¶35

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶36

available is to apply for the upcoming University Supplementary Examination of Vth Semester to clear the paper (AR12-56 Structural Design-I). As far as moderation is concerned, it is limited to a maximum of 5% of the aggregate marks of the University’s external examinations per year/semester, subject to the condition that a maximum of 10% can be given for a pass in an individual paper. Ext.P12 is a representation filed by the petitioner before the 1^st respondent requesting to grant her 20 marks as moderation or in

¶37

the alternative to allow her to attend the internal examination once again. It is also contended that the petitioner has been given 4 chances from 2018 to 2021, but her internal marks remained the same at 13. It is also pointed out that in the representation, the petitioner has not stated the register number and the session of the examination.

¶38

The counsel for the 2^nd respondent submits that they

¶39

don’t have any objection to conducting the internal examination for

¶40

¶41

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶42

the petitioner once again. It is seen that the petitioner has completed a Bachelor of Architecture Course. She has passed all the examinations except for one paper, i.e. Structural Design – 1. Only because of the low mark obtained in the internal examination, she could not pass out successfully the 5-year course.

¶43

The petitioner, a student who has passed all the examinations except one paper, requests this Court’s indulgence to pass appropriate orders, allowing her to appear for internal examination once again. This Court cannot direct the University or the College to conduct the internal examination for the petitioner, but at the same time, this Court can direct the University to take up Ext.P12 and pass appropriate orders. Therefore, I give liberty to the petitioner to file an additional representation incorporating all the details in continuation to Ext.P12, and if such a representation is filed within a period of one week from today, the 1^st respondent or the competent authority shall take up Ext.P12 along with the additional

¶44

¶45

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶46

representation filed and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Needless to say, while disposing of the representation, the fact that the petitioner has cleared all the papers except one that too due to the low internal marks shall also be considered.

¶47

Writ Petitioner disposed of.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

W.P.(C) No.20256 of 2023

¶53

¶54

PETITIONER EXHIBITS:

¶55

`Exhibit P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `CERTIFICATE DATED 5.`	`THE COURSE COMPLETION` `03.2022`
`Exhibit P2`	`THE TRUE COPY CONDU` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT D`	`CT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY` `ATED 5.03.2022`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE S` `2ND SEMESTER DATED 2`	`HEET OF COMBINED 1ST AND` `.01.2019`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE` `DATED 20.10.2021`	`SHEET OF 3RD SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF EXAM` `DATED NIL`	`RESULT OF 4TH SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF EXAM` `DATED NIL`	`RESULT OF 5TH SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE` `DATED 23.02.2022`	`SHEET OF 6TH SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE` `SEMESTER DATED 26.03`	`SHEET OF 7TH AND 8TH` `.2021`
`Exhibit P9`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE` `DATED 15.12.2021`	`SHEET OF 9TH SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P10`	`TRUE COPY OF GRADE` `DATED 17.12.2021`	`SHEET OF 10TH SEMESTER`
`Exhibit P11`	`TRUE COPY OF TRAN` `5.03.2022.`	`SFER CERTIFICATE DATED`
`Exhibit P12`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `THE PETITIONER DATED`	`REPRESENTATION FILED BY` `14.06.2023`

¶56

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS:
Exhibit R1(a)True copy of the University Order UO
No.1050/2013/CU dated 02.04.2013.

Minna Elizabeth v. Calicut University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minna Elizabeth v. Calicut University

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

Dr.a.Nujum Vs State of Kerala

K.Balan Master Vs Director, Genenral Education, Higher Secondary Section

Anantha Padmanabhan C S, Vs Registrar

Devananda Arunkumar Vs the Kerala University of Health Science

Shubhank O.S. Vs St. Aloysius College

Gopika K.S Vs Mahatma Gandhi University Represented by Its Registrar