Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 26827
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J
ASWIN THANKAPAN – Appellant
Versus
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT – Respondent
WP(C)/14324/2018
SRI.S.RENJITH, SRI.K.R.PRATHISH, SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE
The decision emphasizes the importance of fair and transparent assessment practices in academic institutions, affirming students' rights to seek redress for grading issues.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Writ Petition - Article 226 List - The court directed the university to consider the petitioners' representation regarding internal marks for improved assessment within a specified period, emphasizing the need for fair treatment in academic evaluation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, BBA L.L.B. (Hons) students, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandate for the university to regulate the improvement of internal marks for students who struggled in the internal examinations, claiming discrepancies in mark allocation.
Finding of the Court:
The court ordered the university to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners, ensuring a decision would be made within two months while mandating an opportunity for the petitioners and the principal to be heard.
Issues: Whether the university is obliged to formulate regulations allowing for the improvement of internal marks for the petitioners and ensuring due process in academic evaluations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the principle that educational authorities must ensure equitable and just criteria in academic evaluations, affording students the right to challenge and seek redress for grading discrepancies.
Final Decision: Writ petition disposed, directing university to consider representation within two months.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners, who are BBA L.L.B. (Hons) students in Government Law College, Thrissur, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to formulate regulation enabling the BBA LLB (Hons) students who have completed their course in the academic year 2012-17 in the 4th respondent Government Law College, Thrissur, to improve their internal marks in failed subjects. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent Controller of Examination to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation dated 8.4.2018 submitted by the 1st petitioner and issue an order similar to Ext.P2 dated 7.12.2017, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. On 24.4.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel was directed to get instructions.
:-2-:
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent University representing respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 4th respondent Principal.
4. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they have written all the internal examinations of the whole semester of BBA L.L.B.(Hons) properly and regularly, the marks awarded to them are very low, when compared to other students of the College and hence they are facing difficulty to pass the external examinations as the total marks are calculated on the basis of the internal marks. It is also contended that the students who are awarded less marks in the internals are really struggling to get a pass in the final examinations and the tutors are granting internal marks according to their whims and fancies and not based on merit. Highlighting their grievances, the petitioners have already moved Ext.P4 representation dated 8.4.2018 before the Registrar of the 1st respondent University.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent University would submit that the University shall consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation made by the 1st :-3-:
petitioner, with notice to the 1st petitioner and also the 4th respondent Principal. The learned Standing Counsel would submit that the Registrar of the 1st respondent University shall place the matter for consideration before the academic council.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 1st respondent University to consider and take appropriate decision on Ext.P4 representation, after placing the same before appropriate authority. A decision in this regard shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording the 1st petitioner and also to the
4th respondent Principal an opportunity of being heard.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the allegations made in this writ petition and it is for the appropriate authority to consider Ext.P4 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law.
