SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Online)(KER) 36041

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
RESHMA P S – Appellant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 by which it is informed that the shortage of attendance cannot be condoned.

2. The petitioner was a student of Plus Two course. After passing S.S.L.C. Examination in March 2009, the petitioner joined the fourth respondent's school for Plus Two course and completed the first academic year 2009-2010. During the second year of the Plus Two course, the petitioner underwent medical treatment for 'vertigo' and was absent for the course for a period of four months commencing from 1.10.2010. It is the case of the petitioner that after recovery from the illness, during the first week of February, 2011 the petitioner approached the fourth respondent and sought readmission. But the petitioner was not allowed and then she represented the matter before the second respondent. At that stage, this writ petition was filed.

3. A counter affidavit has filed filed on behalf of the first respondent. It is stated that a minimum of 75% attendance is compulsory for appearing for Plus One and Plus Two Examinations. The Director of WPC.14557/2011 2 Higher Secondary Education is delegated with powers to grant condonation of shortage of attendance to candidates with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top