Dismissed

Johnpaul.B v. The TamilNadu Controller

Madras HC1 Jun 2023WP/13218/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the withholding of an LL.B. exam result, the High Court of Madras denied the prayer for revaluation due to the absence of governing provisions. The Court dismissed the petition but granted liberty to the petitioner for participation in future arrear examinations.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to participate in future arrear examination.

Johnpaul.B Vs The TamilNadu Controller — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 01.06.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶7

B.Johnpaul ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Tamil Nadu Controller of Examination, Dr.Ambedkar Law University, 'Poompzhil' No.5, Dr.D.D.G.S., Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028.

¶10

The Principal, Government Law College, Coimbatore – 600 046.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent pertaining to revaluation of the petitioner's exam papers and to publish the petitioner's result.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ramalingam For Respondents : Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader O R D E R

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶17

This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to the first respondent pertaining to revaluation of the petitioner's exam papers and to publish his result.

¶18

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was joined in the Law College, Coimbatore, under the control of the Ambedkar Law University, Chennai for 3 years L.L.B. Course and he attended his 3^rd year examination conducted by the Law College in February 2022. The exam result was published in time whereas his result was withheld. Hence, he sent a requisition letter to the Controller of Examination on 21.06.2022 to direct the Principal Law College, Coimbatore to release his exam result. He has also sent legal notice through his advocate on 27.09.2022 and 03.10.2022. The Principal Coimbatore Law College sent a reply that the petitioner's result was withheld due to alleged malpractice and exam fee due of Rs.465/-. After the clearance of the due, his withheld result was published on 31^st May, 2022 and the same was displayed in the College notice board. However, the petitioner has failed in few subjects and thereby, the present

¶19

_________ Page 2 of 6

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶22

Writ Petition has been filed for revaluation of the exam papers.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

¶24

that though the exam was conducted in February 2022, the result was published only on 31.05.2022 after a lapse of three months. However, the same was not communicated to the petitioner and the same was communicated to the petitioner only after legal notice was sent by the petitioner. Hence, this Court may issue a direction to the respondents to conduct revaluation and accordingly, he prayed for allowing the Writ Petition.

¶25

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that there is no provision available for revaluation and in the absence of any provision, issuing direction for revaluation is unsusatinable. Though the examination was conducted in February 2022, the result was with held due to alleged malpractice and exam fee due of Rs.465/-. Subsequently, his result was

¶26

_________ Page 3 of 6

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶29

published on 31.05.2022 after clearing the dues, but the petitioner failed to notice it out of inadvertence. That apart, filing the present Writ Petition, that too after a lapse of one year, when such provision for revaluation is not available, is not permissible. However, the petitioner is entitled to participate in the arrear examination. But, the petitioner has not taken any steps for participating in the arrear examination. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶31

Admittedly the petitioner was participated in the examination conducted in February 2022 and the result was published on 31.05.2022, in the college notice board, as claimed by the respondents in the reply dated 11.10.2022 to the legal notice sent by the petitioner. It is further to be noted that the petitioner is entitled to participate in the arrear examination conducted by the Law College and without participating in the arrear

¶32

_________ Page 4 of 6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶35

examination, filing the present Writ Petition after a lapse of one year for revaluation is unsustainable. Hence, the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted.

¶36

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is

¶37

granted to the petitioner to participate in the arrear examination to be conducted by the Law College in the future. No costs.

¶38

01.06.2023

¶39

NCC: Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No

¶40

vji

¶41

¶42

The Tamil Nadu Controller of Examination, Dr.Ambedkar Law University, 'Poompzhil' No.5, Dr.D.D.G.S., Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028.

¶43

The Principal, Government Law College, Coimbatore – 600 046.

¶44

Page 5 of 6

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

vji

W.P.No.13218 of 2023

¶50

01.06.2023

¶51

_________ Page 6 of 6

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Johnpaul.B v. The TamilNadu Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Johnpaul.B v. The TamilNadu Controller

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

Nanthakumar. N Vs The Home Secretary

M/s. Maxivision Eye Hospitals Private Limited Vs The Commissioner

Pushparaj.K Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

C.Raja Vs The Secretary to Government

Sudalai Vs The Addl Divisional Enginner

K.Raman Vs The District Collector