The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the University's regulation of 85% attendance for postgraduate students, emphasizing the need for complete training for medical professionals.

1. Dr.V.Rajasekar / petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.17037 of 2014 has filed the writ petition, seeking for a direction to the respondents to permit him to participate in the Final Year Examination of M.D in Community Medicine to be conducted in April 2015 by the 1st Respondent including forwarding of her Dissertation by the 2nd Respondent to the 1st Respondent duly countersigned by the 2nd respondent.

2. Dr.Y.Lydia / Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.17038 of 2014 has filed the writ petition, seeking for a direction to the respondents to permit her to participate in the Final Year Examination of M.D in Biochemistry to be conducted in April 2015 by the 1st Respondent including forwarding of her Dissertation by the 2nd Respondent to the 1st Respondent duly countersigned by the 2nd respondent.

3. The case of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.17037 of 2014 in nutshell is as follows:

i) Dr.V.Rajasekar / petitioner is an MBBS, employed as Assistant Surgeon under the Government of Tamil Nadu and is qualified to study M.D.Course under the 1st respondent. Pursuant to his admission in M.D. Community Medicine for the academic year 2012-2013, he sought permission from the Government to undergo the said course and by order dated 03.10.2012, the Deputy Director of Health Services, Nagercoil accorded permission to him with some delay to pursue his study at his own cost and also sanctioned Extraordinary Leave for one year. Though he has completed his first and second year successfully and submitted his dissertation countersigned by his guide, the 2nd respondent did not forward the same to the University and later on, it was orally informed to him that owing to shortage of attendance, his dissertation was not forwarded and he was also not permitted to take up his examinations in April, 2015.

ii) It is submitted by Dr.V.Rajasekar / petitioner that the act of the 2nd respondent in not permitting him to participate in the final year M.D.examination of April, 2015 is highly illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and unsustainable. The 2nd respondent college admitted him in the course on 30.06.2012, collected fees for all the three years and finally without disclosing anything about the shortage of attendance, prevented him from appear for the examinations, which is bad in law.

iii) It is also submitted by Dr.V.Rajasekar / petitioner that the 2nd respondent had earlier permitted another Assistant Surgeon, namely, Dr.V.S.Deepa to appear for the examination in April, 2014, though her date of relieving from service was 24.11.2011 and therefore, Dr.V.Rajasekar / petitioner sought extension of the very same treatment to him on par with the said Dr.Deepa.

4. The case of the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.17038 of 2014 in nutshell is as follows:

i) Dr.Y.Lydia / Petitioner is an MBBS, employed as Assistant Surgeon under the Government of Tamil Nadu and is qualified to study M.D. Course under the 1st respondent. Pursuant to his admission in M.D. Biochemistry for the academic year 2012-2013, she sought permission from the Government to undergo the said course and by order dated 30.11.2012, the Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Kulasekaram accorded permission to her with some delay to pursue her study at her own cost and also sanctioned Extraordinary Leave for one year. Though she has completed her first and second year successfully and submitted her dissertation countersigned by her guide, the 2nd respondent did not forward the same to the University and later on, it was orally informed to her that owing to shortage of attendance, her dissertation was not forwarded and she was also not permitted to take up the examinations in April, 2015.

ii) It is submitted by Dr.Y.Lydia / Petitioner that the act of the 2nd respondent in not permitting her to participate in the final year M.D. examination of April, 2015 is highly illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and unsustainable. The 2nd respon