Midhula, Ramseena K.N., Muhsina Beegam P.K. and Jaseel Mubarak vs Kannur University

Antony Dominic, J.—Petitioners are third year BDS students in the second respondent college.

According to the petitioners, the second year examination ought to have been held in October, 2009, but, was held only from 05-04-2010. The third year classes commenced on 01-05-2010. By then, results of the second year examination were not declared and, therefore, the college permitted the petitioners to attend the third year classes. When the results were declared on 14-06-2010, petitioners 1 to 3 failed in one subject each and the 4th petitioner failed in two subjects. They appeared for supplementary examination and results are awaited. However, they had to discontinue the third year course in terms of the regulations of the University, which prescribe that only those who have passed all subjects of the second year can continue their third year course.

In this writ petition, what they seek is a direction to the University to permit them to continue in the third year classes till the publication of the result of the second year supplementary examination and also to allow them to appear for the third year examination if they come out successful in the second year supplementary examination. Admittedly, regulations framed by the Dental Council of India and the University require that only such students who pass all the subjects of the second year, can continue to attend the classes of the third year. In this case, admittedly, petitioners do not satisfy these conditions. If that be so, petitioners can neither attend the classes nor can they be permitted to appear in the examination of the third year.

Learned Counsel for petitioners relied on paragraph 3 of Ext.P2 judgment. Reading of this judgment shows that such a direction, which is inconsistent to the regulations of the University, was issued taking note of the peculiar circumstance that on account of the delay on the part of the University in declaring the results, the students were permitted to continue to attend the classes. Such a situation does not exist here. Therefore, I am not persuaded to direct the University to permit the students to continue to attend the classes or to appear for the third year examination, as the petitioners do not satisfy the conditions laid down in the regulations. Having regard to the above, I am also not inclined to direct consideration of the representation made by the petitioners.

Writ petition fails and it is dismissed.