N.Y.JASMINE Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.C.No.8037 of 2014 challenging the judgment dated 23/05/2014 by the learned Single Judge.

(2.) THE writ petition was filed seeking to quash Ext.P8 by which the University of Kerala has informed the petitioner that M.A.Degree in Hindi under distance education conducted by the Madurai Kamaraj University is not recognised by the University of Kerala as the petitioner has not passed Pre -Degree examination. The fact that the appellant has not passed Pre -Degree examination is not disputed. The relevant definition with reference to grant of equivalency certificate is contained in Clause 2(16) of Chapter - I of Regulations Relating to Recognition of Examinations and Degrees of Other Universities which reads as under:

(3.) A bare reading of Regulation 2(16) would clearly indicate that for obtaining equivalency certificate for M.A Degree in Kerala University, a candidate ought to have undergone the prescribed course of instruction by the duly recognized, regular/correspondence/private study not less than 10+2+3+2(17) years of study pattern in Board/University other than the University of Kerala. When the Rules specifically states that the degrees/examinations of other universities means thereby degree/examination awarded/passed after undergoing the prescribed course of instruction by the duly recognized course of study, it can only mean that the candidate ought to have passed the examinations with respect to 10+2+3+2(17). The words 'unless otherwise specified' can only mean as 'specified as per rules' and cannot amount to any form of waiver as contended by the appellant. When it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has not passed Plus Two examination or Pre - Degree examination, a different view cannot be taken. We do not find any perversity in the findings of the learned Single Judge as the learned Single Judge had correctly interpreted the Regulation and denied the benefit to the petitioner. In the result, we do not think that the grounds urged by the appellant are enough to set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, there being no merits in the appeal, the same is dismissed.