Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 31973
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Devan Ramachandran, J
NIGIN SURESH – Appellant
Versus
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY – Respondent
WP(C)/25785/2020
SHRI. ANOOP KRISHNA KUM, GAYATHRI MURALEEDHARAN, SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN-SC, SMT. NISHA BOSE - SR.GP
Conditionality of attendance requirements can be relaxed in exceptional circumstances, such as program termination, ensuring fairness and academic opportunity.
Headnote:
Attendance - Education Law - University Regulations - Sections on Attendance Condonation - The court ruled on condoning attendance for a student nearing course completion, despite prior condonations, emphasizing the unique circumstances of a vanishing course.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a student suffering from injuries, sought condonation for attendance shortages across multiple semesters to sit for upcoming exams. The University expressed limitations based on regulations, highlighting prior condonations.
Finding of the Court:
The court recognized the unique situation of the petitioner, whose course was ending, and the potential inability to redo semesters. Previous court decisions were cited as precedent to allow attendance condonation in such cases.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to condonation of attendance in light of prior condonations and the impending expiration of the academic program.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that unique circumstances, such as the vanishing nature of the program, warrant exceptions to standard rules regarding attendance condonation.
Final Decision: The court ordered the University to condone the attendance shortage upon timely submission of paperwork, allowing the petitioner to sit for exams.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that he is a randonneur and had suffered sprain and other muscular and ligamental injury on account of extensive practice and consequently, had been laid up during the time when he was pursuing his 8th semester of BA (Criminology) LLB (Hons) with the 3rd respondent-College; and therefore, prays that his shortage in attendance be directed to be condoned by the University at the earliest.
2. The petitioner says that he has already completed his course and that he is now preparing to write the 9th and 10th semester examinations, but apprehends that he will be refused such opportunity if his attendance shortage in the 8th semester is not condoned. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Gayathri Muraleedharan, therefore, prays that the respondents be directed to condone the shortage of attendance and permit her client to write the examinations without any impediment.
3. In response to the afore submissions of the petitioner, Sri.Asok M. Cherian, learned Standing Counsel for the University, submitted that the petitioner had, in fact, shortage of attendance in three semesters, namely, 2nd,5th and 8th, of which, the shortage in the 2nd semester has already been condoned. He submitted that as regards the 5th semester is concerned, even though an application has been made, there were some defects and that the same has been sent back to the 3rd respondent-College for resubmission, after curing all the defects. He then submitted that since the applicable Regulations of the University stipulate that a student will be allowed to seek condonation of shortage of attendance only twice in the entire course, the same in the 8th semester may not be possible.
4. The learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.Nisha Bose, appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent-College, submitted that the papers for condonation of attendance of the petitioner with respect to the 5th semester have been resubmitted yesterday (07.12.2020); while the papers with respect to the 8th semester have not been forwarded to the University yet. She submitted that if this Court is inclined to allow the request of the petitioner as made in this Writ Petition, then the 3rd respondent will forward the application of the petitioner with respect to the 8th semester, provided he makes it within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
5. There is little doubt, going by the applicable Regulations of the University that, normally no student can be allowed to avail condonation of shortage of attendance more than twice in the entire course. In this case, it is virtually admitted that the petitioner's shortage of attendance in the 2nd semester has been condoned; while that with respect to the 5th semester is pending. Therefore, in usual circumstances, there would have been no question of condonation of shortage of attendance in the 8th semester.
6. However, there is an intervening aspect that this Court will have to consider, namely, that the course in question is a vanishing one and the petitioner belongs to the last batch. Obviously, therefore, if the shortage in attendance in the 8th semester is not condoned, he will not be able to redo the said semester since the course is now not open.
7. In fact, it is noticing this aspect that Ext.P4 order was delivered by this Court in RP No.1052/2018 in WP(C)No.25016/2018, allowing the petitioners therein to write the examinations, because there was no corresponding batch of BA (Criminology) LLB to redo the programme. I am certain that the directions in Ext.P4 order would, therefore, apply in its full force to the case of the petitioner herein also.
In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition, directing the petitioner to submit necessary papers for condonation of shortage in attendance with the 3rd respondent- College; and if this is done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be forwarded by its Principal on-line to the University within a period of one w
