PARVATHY P B Vs. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a M.B.B.S student, seeking to quash Ext.P16 mark list, Ext.P17 letter directing the petitioner to attend revision classes in Theory/practical and time table attached to it, Ext.P18 communication dtd. 5/4/2017, providing 6.80 marks to internal assessment and Ext.P19 communication informing the petitioner that, since petitioner has not passed IInd Professional MBBS Examination, the examination undertaken by the petitioner of IIIrd Professional MBBS Part-I and Part-II stands cancelled, and further to declare that petitioner had obtained 8 marks out of 10 in the Internal Assessment of Forensic Medicine of the 2 nd M.B.B.S examination, and has successfully completed the 2 nd M.B.B.S examinations of November, 2014. Necessary facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(2.) The Board of Adjudication of Students' Grievances proceedings, constituted under Chapter 27 of the Calicut University First Statutes accepted a case projected by the petitioner and found victimization by the 3 rd respondent College. The Board directed the University to publish the result of the Internal Assessment of the Forensic Medicine of the petitioner in the 2 nd year MBBS examination by adding the marks of the written portion of the Internal Assessment Examination held at Amala Medical College, pursuant to the recommendation of the enquiry committee in respect of the victimization by changing the centre to Amala Medical College, instead of the marks for the written portion secured at the 3 rd respondent, and to retain the marks awarded for Assignments and Seminars awarded by the 3 rd respondent College. However, the said Ext.P7 order dated 15.07.2016 was not implemented by the 2 nd respondent.

(3.) Matters being so, the Board of Adjudication of students' grievance reviewed its decision taken as per Ext.P7 and directed the petitioner to take the internal examinations again at the 3 rd respondent College, evident from Ext.P13 dated 20.10.2016. However, challenging Ext.P13 order, petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No.32388 of 2016 and by the judgment dated 06.03.2017, the said order was quashed by this Court and directed the University to give effect to Ext.P7 order passed by the Board. However, the University has not implemented the order as directed by this Court. It is submitted, purportedly in the guise of implementing Ext.P14 judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.(C) No.34275 of 2016, a mark list was issued to the petitioner for the IInd Professional MBBS Examination by adding 6.8 marks towards internal assessment, thus securing 28.8 marks for the written and oral examination, and the internal assessment together. According to the petitioner, if the directives contained in Ext.P7 order passed by the 4 th respondent is implemented, then the petitioner is entitled to get 8 marks for internal assessment instead of 6.8 marks awarded in Ext.P16, and if 8 marks are provided, petitioner will get total 30 marks for the IInd Professional MBBS Examination, and thereby secure minimum marks for a pass.