Students have a right to equal opportunities for academic evaluation in accordance with university policies and prior judgments.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners were students of 5-year LLB course (2008 Scheme) at the 4th respondent College. Even though the petitioners had completed the course, they have not passed in all subjects due to the reason that they did not secure sufficient internal examination marks.

2. According to the petitioners, the Board of Studies of the 1st respondent (University), by Ext.P1 order, considered the matter and decided to grant another opportunity, to those students who failed to secure sufficient marks in the internal examinations, to improve their internal marks. In consequence to Ext.P1, one of the branches in the 3rd respondent's office sought clarification from the Dean Faculty of Law of the University, and accordingly Ext.P2 clarification was issued. The petitioners are entitled to the benefit of Exts.P1 and P2. Hence, the petitioners have preferred Ext.P3 representation before the 1st respondent.

However, the same has not been considered.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that this Court by Ext.P4 judgment granted the petitioners therein the benefit of Exts.P1 and P2. Hence, the petitioners are also entitled to the same benefit. Therefore, the petitioners seek a declaration that they are entitled for improving their internal examination marks in light of Exts.P1 and P2 and the judgment in W.P (C ) No.303 of 2020.

4. Heard Sri.Tony Augustine, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 4th respondent.

5. This Court while considering a case of identical nature, by Ext.P4 judgment allowed the writ petition in view of the following findings:

“12. A reading of the aforequoted portions of Ext.P3(a) and P8 clearly substantiate that the Board for Adjudication of Students Grievances had taken a conscious decision to confer the benefit on all students of Under Graduate Programes in Law for re-doing their internal examinations. The said matter was placed before the Academic Council, which also resolved to grant students a chance to redo their internal examinations. The above unanimous decisions were accepted by the Vice-Chancellor, who accorded sanction to implement the resolution of the Academic Council dated 05.10.2019. Similarly, in Ext.P8 order, it is categorically mentioned that the order is passed to confer the benefit of improvement of internal marks to students of all under graduate programmes in law of the University without any time period. It is specifically mentioned in Clause 5 of Ext.P8 that the stipulation in University Order No.150/2016/PB stipulating the time period of N+2(+1) years in exceptional cases for completing the courses has to be harmoniously construed with Ext.P7.

13. Therefore, the contention of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in the statement that, in view of U.O No.150/2016/PB, the first petitioner cannot be given the benefit to re-do the internal examinations is untenable and unsustainable in law. The University cannot now take a volte-face and contend that Ext.P8 does not confer the right on all students of the undergraduate programme in law, to redo their internal examinations, in view of the earlier order, which has not even been placed before this Court. 14. The University has consciously included University Order No.150/2016/PB in Ext.P8 for the purpose of conferring the benefits on all Under Graduate Students in the programme of Law.

15. In view of the unambiguous wordings in Exts.P7 and P8, I am of the considered opinion that the 1st petitioner is entitled to re-do his internal examinations based on Exts.P7 and P8. Hence, the benefit of Ext.P5 notification is to be extended to the first petitioner, in view of Exts.P7 and P8.”

6. Subsequently, this Court by its common judgment dated 12.8.2020 in a batch of cases in W.P(C) No.35975/2019, 440/2020, 918/2020 and 1928/2020, also relying on Ext.P4 judgment, confirmed Exts.P1 and P2 interim orders and directed the Univer