LALJI R Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was a M. Ed student under the Kerala University. In the examination held in February, 2007, she appeared and was issued Ext. P1 mark list. For the written examination of IIIrd paper, Philosophical and Sociological Foundations of Education, she was secured 47 marks, Ext. R1(a) proceedings of the Controller of Examinations shows that, with the marks she secured, the petitioner was eligible to be awarded 3rd rank. However, rank certificate was not issued despite the representations made.

(2.) While matters stood thus, newspapers of 1st May, 2009, carried a news stating that the 4th respondent, who had initially secured 22 marks and failed in the paper III, succeeded in getting her answer paper revalued five times and was finally awarded 47 marks and thus managed to secure second rank in the final examination. It was also reported that the 4th respondent is a leader of Students Federation of India and was the Vice Chairperson of the University Union. The suggestion was that it was on account of her political influence she could manage to get her answer paper revalued even in the absence of any regulation providing for the same. Ext. P2 is the copy of the news report. Petitioner submits that, on coming to know of these developments, she made enquiries and came to know that the University had revalued the answer paper of the 4th respondent, allegedly in implementation of the judgment of this Court in WP (C) No. 18680/07, a copy of which is Ext. P3.

(3.) According to the petitioner, when results were declared, coming to know that she had secured only 22 marks and failed paper III, complaining about the valuation and making allegations against the valuers, the 4th respondent filed the aforesaid writ petition, which was disposed of Ext. P3 judgment of by this Court directing the Vice Chancellor to examine the grievances she had raised in the complaint. It is stated that in pursuance to the said direction, the Vice Chancellor called for the remarks of the Chairman of the Board of Studies regarding the competence of examiner and the method adopted for valuation of paper III. It is stated that the Chairman reported that there was no irregularity in the evaluation process. It is stated that, ignoring the said report, the politically constituted Syndicate of the University ordered revaluation of paper Ill of the 4th respondent by somebody from outside the State. Thus according to the petitioner, misusing the directions in Ext. P3 judgment, the answer paper was revalued, inflated marks were given and rank was assigned to the 4th respondent.