No legal entitlement exists for redoing internal assessments without a statutory provision, regardless of fee payment.

JUDGMENT

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

This appeal is filed by the writ petitioner challenging the judgment dated 30.09.2020 in W.P.(C) No. 17702 of 2020, whereby the following reliefs sought for in the writ petition were declined by the learned single Judge:

1.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the respondents 1 to 3 to issue hall ticket to the petitioner herein that would enable the petitioner to redo the internal assessment of 3rd semester English paper, within a time frame fixed by this Court or as expeditiously as possible.

2.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the 4th respondent to conduct the internal reassessment of the petitioner’s 3rd semester English paper and to duly forward the result of such re- assessment to the 1st respondent within a time frame fixed by this Court or as expeditiously as possible.

3.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the respondents 1 to 3 to immediately publish the result or outcome of the internal re- assessment of the petitioner herein within a time frame fixed by this Court or as expeditiously as possible.

2. The learned single Judge, after taking into account the subject issues raised by the appellant as well as the University, has entered into the following findings:

“4. When I hear Sri.Asok M.Cherian as afore, it is without doubt that the petitioner can seek the reliefs in this writ petition not on the basis of any statutory provision but only as an indulgence from the University. However, since the University has already granted an opportunity to all students through Annexure R1(a), taking note of the fact that the earlier internal evaluation done by the College was not satisfactory, the petitioner ought to have accepted that opportunity. However, he unequivocally admits that though he had applied for redoing his internal examinations for Semesters 1 and 2, he had not done so for the 3rd Semester, allegedly because he was under the impression that he had cleared the said Semester.

5. I am afraid that since this is a mistake committed by the petitioner himself, I cannot direct the Mahatma Gandhi University to grant him any further latitude; particularly, when it is not supported by any provision in the applicable Statutes, Rules or Regulations.

In the afore circumstances, recording the afore submissions made on behalf of the University by Sri.Asok M.Cherian, I close this writ petition, without issuing any further orders.”

It is, thus, challenging the legality and correctness of the said judgment, this appeal is filed.

3. Brief material facts for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:

The appellant has filed the writ petition complaining that respondents 1 to 3 i.e., the Mahatma University, the Vice Chancellor and the Controller of Examinations have conducted themselves arbitrarily in not issuing the hall ticket to the appellant for the internal redo assessment even after accepting the required fee for the same. According to the appellant, pursuant to Ext.P1 representation submitted by the appellant to the Vice Chancellor of the Mahatma University, he was instructed to reappear for internal reassessment again and thereupon, he remitted the stipulated fee for redoing the internal assessment. However, the hall ticket has not been issued. It is further submitted that even though the appellant personally approached the first respondent University for the issuance of the hall ticket, no action was taken.

4. The case of the appellant was that he was informed that since the concerned officer/staff is unable to attend the office due to pandemic Covid-19, they were not in a position to take any action, and that the inaction on the part of the officials has resulted in causing serious prejudice to him. According to him, the inaction on the part of respondents 1 to 3 to discharge their duty alleging Covid pandemic reasons cannot be sustained. It was in the said b