LAWS(KER)-2009-12-217

BINIL BABU, S/O BABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA; PRINCIPAL & CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT; VICE CHANCELLOR, M G UNIVERSITY; CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS

Decided On December 02, 2009
BINIL BABU, S/O BABU Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA; PRINCIPAL And CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT; VICE CHANCELLOR, M G UNIVERSITY; CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides.

(2.) The petitioner who is undergoing the B.Tech degree course in Electronics & Communication Engineering appeared for the supplementary first and second semester B.Tech degree examination conducted by the Mahatma Gandhi University on 21.5.2009. On the allegation that he had committed malpractice in the examination held on 21.5.2009, the Chief Superintendent issued Ext.P2 memo dated 21.5.2009 informing the petitioner that he will not be allowed to appear for the remaining papers of the supplementary first and second semester B.Tech degree examination. It appears that the sixth semester B.Tech degree examination was also being held simultaneously. In view of Ext.P2 memo, the petitioner was not permitted to appear for the said examination also. This writ petition was filed on 25.5.2009 challenging Ext.P2 memo and seeking a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear for the remaining papers of the 6th semester B.Tech degree examination. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 on the ground that due to extraneous reasons, the Principal in charge who was also the Chief Superintendent, has falsely accused him of malpractice committed in the examination held on 21.5.2009. He submits that the Invigilators who were supervising the examination have no complaint whatsoever that he had committed malpractice in the examination held on 21.5.2009.

(3.) By order passed on 25.5.2009, this Court directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear for the remaining papers of the sixth semester examination on a provisional basis. This Court also directed that the result of the examination in so far as it relates to the petitioner need not be published. This Court also directed that the enquiry if any initiated against the petitioner shall be completed within two months from 25.5.2009 and the result of the enquiry placed before this Court. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner appeared for the remaining papers of the sixth semester examination.