Back
2008 Supreme(Online)(KER) 29821
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S. SIRI JAGAN, J
RAJANI.K – Appellant
Versus
SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRI – Respondent
WP(C)/17787/2008
SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN, SRI. E.C.BINEESH
The court upheld the principle that students should not be penalized for administrative failures, supporting their right to education under constitutional provisions.
Headnote:
Education - Examination Results - Article 14 - Summary of Provisions and Court Interpretation
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a student, was unable to see the results of her 1st Semester examination until 28.3.08, but attended 2nd Semester classes based on attendance records. The University later claimed lack of minimum attendance due to the delay in declaring the earlier results.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that since the petitioner's admission was regularised and she had sufficient attendance, there was no basis for denying her the rights to sit for examinations.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was unjustly penalized for attendance issues due to delayed results by the University.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the petitioner should not suffer due to administrative delays, emphasizing the right to education and proper redress under Article 14.
Final Decision: The writ petition was closed, allowing the petitioner to continue her studies and sit for exams.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a student of M.A. Literature (Sanskrit). The petitioner appeared for the 1st Semester examination. But the results of the 1st Semester examination of the petitioner were not declared, because of certain technical reasons, till 28.3.08. However, the petitioner was allowed to continue studies in the 2nd Semester and the petitioner attended classes regularly. According to the petitioner, as is evident from Ext.P2, the petitioner has the required attendance in the 2nd Semester necessary for appearing for the 2nd Semester examination. She wrote the 2nd Semester examination also. Subsequently, the University, by Ext.P4 order, informed the College that the petitioner does not have the minimum attendance for writing the 2nd Semester examination, apparently on the basis that he could have attended classes in the 2nd semester only after declaration of result of the 1st Semester examination on 28.3.2008. The petitioner's contention is that it was not because of any fault on the part of the petitioner that this difficulties arose, but only because of the delay of the University in declaring the results of her 1st Semester examination. She would further submit that in so far as she had attended the classes and obtained required attendance for the 2nd Semester, now that the admission has been regularised, the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of the attendance she has obtained validly as permitted by the authorities. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:
“i. Issue a writ of Certiorari to quash Exhibit P4 Order as illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India .
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to attend the 3rd semester classes.
iii. Declare that petitioner shall not be punished for the alleged technical reasons alleged by the University and may declare that petitioner was eligible to attend the 2nd semester classes and examination.
iv. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P5, as per law, with an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, without any further delay.”
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submits that now that the petitioner's admission has been regularised, she can have the benefits of the 2nd Semester examination also and continue the studies. This submission is recorded and the writ petition is closed.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd
