Back
2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22369
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SHAJI P.CHALY, J
JOHAN VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 32751/2017
Candidates have the right to improve their grades in two theory subjects in the immediate subsequent examination under specified regulations.
Headnote:
Improvement - Examination Rights - Regulations - Clause 13
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, having completed a B.Tech degree with specific grades, sought to improve his marks in two subjects by appearing for the subsequent semester examination, claiming a violation of his rights under the applicable regulations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the regulations allow candidates to improve grades in two subjects in an immediate subsequent examination and directed the University to permit the petitioner to improve his marks if no legal impediments were present.
Issues: Whether the petitioner has the right to improve his marks in specific subjects in the immediate subsequent examination as per the applicable regulations.
Ratio Decidendi: The interpretation of Clause 13 confirms the petitioner's eligibility for improvements, emphasizing the regulatory framework governing examination rights.
Final Decision: The court directed the University to allow the petitioner to improve his grades if no legal impediments exist.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner has passed his B.Tech degree in Computer Science and Engineering from the 3rd respondent college. In the examination conducted in May 2017, petitioner passed all subjects in all semesters and secured 59.94% marks, evident from Ext.P1. Petitioner got 'C' grade in the subject 'High Performance Computing' (Subject Code CS010801) and 'D' grade in 'Artificial Intelligence' (Subject Code CS10802). In Ext.P1, the aggregate marks obtained by the petitioner in all subjects for B.Tech degree examination is 5185 out of 8650 marks. Therefore, petitioner intends to improve the marks in the above two subjects by appearing for the examination to be conducted in the next semester examination i.e., during November, 2017. According to the petitioner, 1st respondent has taken away the right for improving the two theory papers of the last semester in the immediate semester examination as stated in Ext.P6 Course Regulations prevailing from 2010. It is thus seeking appropriate direction, this writ petition is filed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the University.
3. The subject matter of issue raised in the writ petition revolves round clause 13 of Ext.P6 Regulations , which read thus: “13. Improvement Candidates shall be allowed to improve the grade of any two theory subjects in a semester. This can be done only in the immediate subsequent chance. If the candidate gets more marks in the improvement chance, marks scored in the improvement chance will be considered for grading in the subject; otherwise marks scored in the first attempt will be retained. No candidate shall be permitted to improve the marks scored in practical examinations and internal continuous assessment.”
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that, the regulation applicable to the petitioner is Ext.P6 and therefore, appropriate direction may be issued. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that, necessary fee for participating in the improvement examination is also paid by the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the University to consider the application submitted by the petitioner and if there are no other legal impediments standing in the way, permit the petitioner to improve the subjects specified above and in accordance with law. Necessary arrangement shall be made by the 3rd respondent in accordance with the directions contained above and issued by the University pursuant to the direction made above.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
