SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Ker) 307

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Principal, St. Joseph College – Appellant
Versus
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:Baby Issac Illickal, Advocate. For the Respondents:C. Dilip, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. The second respondent joined for the course of B.A.Multimedia in the petitioner college. He sat for a supplementary examination in a couple of papers of the first semester. The University, which conducts the examination, was not satisfied with the manner in which the examination was conducted in the petitioner's college. On ground that the University was not satisfied with the conduct of the examination, results were not announced. The second respondent was undergoing a course where he would have got further opportunities to write the supplementary examinations. Instead, he filed a complaint before the CDRF seeking compensation. The college has filed this writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the CDRF to adjudicate the matter.

2. The University is a statutory body. It conducts examination in terms of its regulations. The college does not have any role in the matter of holding the examination other than to participate as the duly controlled agent of the University to conduct the examination. This is done under the control of the Controller of Examinations of the University. Obviously, the ultimate authority to supervise and conduct the examination is the Unive

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top