V.

Sandhya vs University Of Kerala on 17 March, 2011

Kerala High Court

V.Sandhya vs University Of Kerala on 17 March, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7518 of 2011(L)

1. V.SANDHYA, W/O.JAYABOSE,
... Petitioner
Vs

1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,
...

Respondent

2. PATTAMTHANU PILLAI MEMORIAL

For Petitioner

:SRI.T.A.SHAJI

For Respondent

: No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

Dated :17/03/2011
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
------------------------W.P (C) No.7518 of 2011
-------------------------Dated this the 17th March, 2011
J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to be given to the 1st respondent to
publish the results of the 2nd Semester B.Ed English Examination and to issue the mark list and
Degree Certificate to the petitioner, in accordance with law.
2. ` The prayer is resisted on many a ground particularly as to the absence of recognition. The
University contends that the candidate who seeks admission to a course of study in the Kerala
University who obtained their basic qualification from other Universities has to submit an eligibility
certificate from the Kerala University for admission to a particular course. Eligibility certificate will
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/45128785/

V.Sandhya vs University Of Kerala on 17 March, 2011

be issued to those courses of study which are recognized by the Kerala University as equivalent to
the corresponding courses in the Kerala University. It is stated that in respect of those courses which
are not recognized by the Kerala University, the W.P (C) No. 7518 of 2011 students will have to apply
for individual recognition of the course.
3. With regard to the case in hand, it is stated that the degree passed by the petitioner in B.A of
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University under Distance Education Programme is not recognized by
the Kerala University. It is also stated that the petitioner secured admission to the B.Ed course
without producing the Eligibility Certificate; simultaneously adding that appropriate directions have
been given to all the Heads of Departments and also to other institutions concerned to obtain the
Eligibility Certificate from the candidates who have secured their Degrees from the University other
than the Kerala University.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits with reference to the decision rendered by the
Supreme Court in Sanatan Gauda Vs. Berhampur University and Others [(1990) 3 SCC 23] that,
once the University grants admission and permits the petitioner to write the examination, it is no
more open to the University to take a U-turn and deny the benefits flowing therefrom. W.P (C) No.
7518 of 2011
5. The learned counsel also makes a specific reference to the observations made by the Apex Court in
paragraph 15, which is extracted below.
"This is apart from the fact that I find that in the present case the appellant while
securing his admission in the Law College had admittedly submitted his marks sheet
along with the application for admission. The Law College had admitted him. He had
pursued his studies for two years. The University had also granted him the admission
card for the Pre-Law and Intermediate Law Examinations. He was permitted to
appear in the said examinations. He was also admitted to the final year of the course.
It is only at the stage of the declaration of his results of the Pre-Law and Inter Law
Examinations that the University raised the objection to his so-called ineligibility to
be admitted to the Law Course. The University is therefore, clearly estopped from
refusing to declare the results of the appellant's examination or from preventing him
from pursuing his final year course."
6. It is brought to the notice of this Court during the course of hearing that, there is absolutely no
misrepresentation from the part of the petitioner in securing admission and there is no case for the
University as well. Since the respondents do not have a specific case as to any fraudulent act on the
part of the petitioner and in view of the fact that the petitioner was permitted to write W.P (C) No.
7518 of 2011 the examination and further since two years are already over, this Court finds that the
petitioner is justified in seeking for the reliefs sought for in the writ petition.
7. In the above circumstances, the respondents are directed to publish the result of the examination
and issue the mark list, as sought for. This shall be done, within 'one month' from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment.
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/45128785/

V.Sandhya vs University Of Kerala on 17 March, 2011

8. However, it is made clear that this will not bar the way of the University in proceeding with the
steps regarding the recognition of the course as pointed out above.
The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/45128785/