Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 21538
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942 WP(C).No.342 OF 2021(P)
PETITIONER:
VARUN KRISHNAN S., AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SAJITH V.K, MBBS (2016) STUDENT (REGISTER NUMBER
160010095), GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KANNUR, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, PARIYARAM), PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. KANNUR 670 503, RESIDING AT KRISHNA (H) , 7/193E, LAKE VIEW GARDENS, PALLIMATTOM, EROOR P.O. TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, 682 306.
BY ADVS.
SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O.
THRISSUR 680 596.
2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THRISSUR 680 596.
3 THE GOVERNING COUNCIL, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THRISSUR 680 596.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON.
4 MALPRACTICES AND LAPSES ENQUIRY COMMITTEE, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THRISSUR 680 596.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
5 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THRISSUR 680 596.
6 GOVERNEMNT MEDICAL COLLEGE , KANNUR, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, PARIYARAM), PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. KANNUR 670 503, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
7 THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KANNUR, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, PARIYARAM, )
PARIYARAM, MEDICAL COCKLE P.O. KANNUR 670 503.
R1-5 BY SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES GP- SRI. UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
['DEEPU LAL MOHAN', '', 'SRI MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN', 'SHRI P SREEKUMAR', 'SC', 'KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES']
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of January 2021 This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:
i) To call for the records leading to Ext.P6 and quash the same to the extent it imposes punishment on the petitioner.
ii) To declare the action of the respondents in imposing Ext.P6 punishment on the petitioner as illegal and invalid.
iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 5th respondent to forthwith publish the result of the second professional MBBS Degree examinations, February, 2020 written by the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-University.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner, who is a 2016 batch MBBS student in the 6th respondent- College, had appeared for the Second Professional MBBS examination held on 10.03.2020. A mobile phone was seized from him by the invigilator. It is submitted that though the petitioner had submitted his explanations before the authorities and had specifically stated that it was completely out of oversight that he had forgotten to leave the mobile phone outside, the maximum punishment, that is debarring for the present and one further chance in the examination had been imposed on him by Ext.P6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation against him was that the cellphone was seized from him and that even the candidates who were found copying have been inflicted with a lesser punishment by Ext.P6. It is contended that the supplementary examination is due to be held on 20.01.2021 and that the last date for registration is on 09.01.2021. It is therefore contended that in view of the fact that there is no allegation that the petitioner was found to be copying in the examination, the respondents ought to permit the petitioner to at least appear in the supplementary examinations and to provisionally permit the petitioner to register for the same. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that the petitioner, being a 2016 batch student, was well aware of the interdiction against carrying mobile phones into the examination halls and that Ext.P7 examination guidelines specifically provide the punishment of barring of the current and one further chance for being in possession of mobile phones in the examination halls. It is contended that the petitioner, who was admittedly in possession of a mobile phone cannot contend that the penalty inflicted on him is too harsh.
5. Having considered the contentions advanced on either side, I am of the opinion that this Court may not be justified in interfering with a penalty imposed for a malpractice in an examination. The factual aspects of the matter cannot be considered by this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In case the petitioner has a grievance with regard to the penalty inflicted on him by Ext.P6, it is for the petitioner to seek a review of the penalty before the Governing Council of the University.
In the above view of the matter, in case the petitioner approaches the 3rd respondent seeking a review of the penalty imposed by Ext.P6, the 3rd respondent shall take a decision on the matter without further delay. The issue will be considered at the next meeting of the Governing Council and in case the Governing Council decides to reduce the penalty imposed, the petitioner shall be given a chance to appear in the examination being conducted later this month.
With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SVP APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE PRINTOUT OF E-MAIL DATED 18.08.2020 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 THE PRINTOUT OF E-MAIL DATED 20.08.2020 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE
