AJITH KUMAR Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who had appeared for M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine Examination held on May/June 2008 by the 1st respondent University has come up before this Court for declaring the result of M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine Examination held in June 2008 and January 2009 as invalid on the ground practical and viva examinations were held against Ext. P22 Regulations and also for a direction directing respondents 1 to 4 to conduct M.D. (Pulmonary) practical examination for the petitioner at the earliest with an examination board other than the examination board which conducted that examination on 26.06.2008 and also to direct respondents 2 and 3 to pass orders cancelling the petitioner's attempt in the examination for M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine held on May/June 2008 and also to consider his next examination as the first examination as recommended by the 4th respondent in Ext. P3.

(2.) THE petitioner is a lecturer of Pulmonary Medicine, who was working at Medical College, Thrissur. He appeared for M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine Examination held on May/June 2008. The petitioner alleges that while he was a student, the 5th respondent, who is the present Head of Department was a professor of Pulmonary Medicine and due to reason beyond the comprehension and for no perceptible reasons, she had been behaving in a hostile manner against the petitioner for the past several years. The petitioner alleges that during the practical of M.D. (Pulmonary) Examinations conducted on 26.6.2008, the panel of examination was headed by the 5th respondent. The petitioner alleges that the atmosphere inside the interview room was hostile and the 5th respondent told the petitioner clearly in front of the other panel members of the board, that she would not let him to get qualified for the M.D. not merely this time but even in the future as long as she continues to be the Head of the Department. In such circumstances, the petitioner preferred a complaint before the controller of examinations placing all these facts before him and requesting to enquire in the matter. The petitioner also approached the Directorate of Medical Education seeking intervention in the matter. The Directorate of Medical Education after conducting a detailed enquiry in the matter, had requested the controller of examinations of the 1st respondent University to consider the request for cancelling his attempt in examination for M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine and also to consider his next examination as the first examination. The petitioner further alleges that even though, he was heard by the examination committee headed by Dr. Mohammed Kunju and the committee without referring to the order passed by the Director of Medical Education informed him that they have no plan but to reject his request and informed him that his result would be published on the same day itself as failed. They also directed the petitioner to apply for the next examination to be held on 15.12.2008. The petitioner further alleges that thereafter he approached the 2nd respondent highlighting all these aspects and requesting him to look into the matter and to issue necessary orders to cancel the early attempt in the examination for M.D. (Pulmonary) Medicine of the petitioner and to consider the next examination as the first examination as per the recommendation of the Director of Medical Education. However, the respondent has not considered the representation filed by the petitioner and on the contrary, issued Ext. P5 letter declaring the petitioner's result as failed. It is with this background, the petitioner approached this Court.

(3.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 3 filed a counter affidavit contending as follows.