**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT :**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN**
**THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930**
**W.P(C).No. 1715 of 2008(D)**
**-------------------------**
**PETITIONER:**
**------------**
**JASINTHA LAKRA, OUR LADY'S CONVENT, THOPUMPADY, KOCHI.**
**BY ADV. SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN**
**SRI.HARIKRISHNAN RAVINDRAN**
**RESPONDENTS:**
**-------------**
**1. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KANNUR.**
**2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, KANNUR.**
**BY ADV. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY - R1 & R2**
**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
## **W.P(C).No. 1715/2008**
## **APPENDIX**
## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:**
**EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE MARK SHEET OF THE FIRST YEAR B.A. DEGREE EXAMINATION IN THE YEAR,1997.**
**EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE MARK SHEET OF THE SECOND YEAR B.A. DEGREE EXAMINATION IN THE YEAR 1998.**
**EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE B.A. DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANGALORE UNIVERSITY IN THE YEAR 1999.**
**EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF RASHTRABHASAH PRAVEEN AWARDED IN THE YEAR 2004.**
**EXHIBIT P5 : A RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PROSPECTUS ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, 2006.**
**EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE M.G. UNIVERSITY DATED 19/06/2001.**
**EXHIBIT P7 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MARKS SHEET OF RASHTRABASHA PRAVEEN UTTARARDH EXAMINATION AWARDED BY THE DAKSHINA BHARAT HINDI PRACHAR SABHA, MADRAS DATED 4/04/2003.**
**EXHIBIT P8 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MARKS SHEET OF RASHTRABASHA PRAVEEN POORVARDH EXAMINATION AWARDED BY THE DAKSHINA BHARAT HINDI PRACHAR SABHA, MADRAS DATED 6/10/2002.**
**EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 19/03/2008.**
**EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEO, ERNAKULAM TO THE MANAGER, OLCGHS, PALLURUTHY DATED 24/03/2008.**
## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:**
**EXHIBIT R1(a): A TRUE COPY OF THE REGULATIONS OF B.ED COURSE.**
**/TRUE COPY/**
**P.A. TO JUDGE**
## **scm**
## **S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 7[th] day of August, 2008.**
## **J U D G M E N T**
The petitioner is a student who passed B.Ed examination who is facing with a very disastrous situation of her career, whereby the University seeks to cancel the examination undergone by her on the ground that she did not have the basic qualification for admission to B.Ed course which she has undergone. The facts necessary for deciding the issue in this writ petition may be summerised as under.
2. The petitioner passed the Rashtrabhasha Praveen Examination conducted by the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha. She also has B.A. degree in Economics, Psychology and Sociology with Hindi as a language. She applied for admission to B.Ed course in various colleges in Kerala through the centralised admission system whereby the Commissioner of entrance examination conducts a
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008
- 2 -
common entrance test and allots students from the rank list prepared to various colleges. Petitioner passed the entrance test. The petitioner applied producing all the certificates which were verified by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations. The Commissioner of Entrance Examination, without any objections accepted the application and allows her to writ the entrance test. She wrote the entrance examination and obtained a rank sufficient to enable her to get admission for B.Ed. She was admitted to a private college pursuant to which she completed the course and wrote the B.Ed examination. But the results of her examination were withheld. Subsequently, she came to understand that the results were withheld on the ground that she did not have the basic qualification prescribed for admission to B.Ed course namely; BA in Hindi. It is at that juncture the petitioner had filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:
“i) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to declare the petitioner's results for B.Ed course in Hindi forthwith;
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008
- 3 -
ii) declare that the petitioner is fully qualified in the B.Ed course for which she was admitted on the basis of Ext.P5 prospectus and the respondents are bound to declare the results;
iii) issue any other such writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fir and necessary in order to meet the ends of justice on the facts and in the circumstances of the instant case;”
3. She sought for an interim order for declaration of results. By interim order dated 11.3.2008 this court directed declaration of the petitioner's result. The petitioner has passed the examination in the 2[nd] class. She is now working as a High School Assistant in a private school.
4. The petitioner raises several contentions. According to her, the Rashtrabhasha Praveen examination she has passed is equal to B.A degree in Hindi. She would also submit that under Chapter XXXI of the Kerala Education Rules, the qualification prescribed for High School Assistant (Hindi) is a degree in Hindi or Praveen of the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha with a pass in SSLC examination conducted by the Commissioner of Government
- 4 -
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008
Examinations. Therefore, according to her, the qualification obtained by her is equivalent to a degree in Hindi. She also points out that in Ext.P7 mark list of Praveen examination issued to her by the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, it is specifically stated that standard of Hindi prescribed in the equivalent examination is B.A. The petitioners submission is that she applied to the Commissioner of entrance examinations producing the certificates relating to the above qualifications which were verified by the Commissioner of entrance examination and she was allotted to a particular college by the Commissioner of entrance examination after being satisfied that the petitioner is qualified for admission. She would also submit that after admission, the college is required to forward the certificate of each candidate admitted in the college to the University which has verified the same and confirmed that the admission is proper. It is after all these procedures that the petitioner was permitted by the University to write the
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008 - 5 -
examination. According to her, after having completed the above procedure and having written the examination the University cannot contend that petitioner cannot keep the result of the examination because she did not have basic qualification for admission to the B.Ed course. She also relies on the Supreme Court decision in **Shri Krishnan** v. **The Kurukshetra University (1976) 1 Supreme Court Cases 311** in support of the contention that after having permitted the student to write the examination the University cannot cancel the examination on any ground.
5. The University has filed a counter affidavit. According to them, the regulations of the University prescribe that the qualification for being eligible for admission to B.Ed course is BA degree in Hindi language and literature with 45% marks or BA/B.Sc. with 50% marks with Part II Hindi and not less that 50% marks for Masters Degree in Hindi and Hindi language and literature. In the prospectus issued pursuant to which the petitioner applied
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008
- 6 -
for admission to B.Ed also, these qualifications are stipulated as the qualification for admission to B.Ed course. Even assuming that Praveen examination of the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha is equivalent to BA, in so far as the regulations do not prescribe as equivalent qualification to BA degree with Hindi language and literature as sufficient, the qualification now possessed by the petitioner cannot be held as sufficient for the purpose of becoming qualified for admission to B.Ed course in the University. He would submit that the regulations prescribed are statutory and the University has no powers to hold that the qualifications of the petitioner are sufficient for admission to B.Ed course.
6. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
7. If the matter had come up before this Court at the time of admission itself, a very strict view in this regard could have been taken to deny admission to the petitioner. But, here, without any fault on the part of the petitioner all
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008 - 7 -
the competent authorities had considered the application for admission of the petitioner as valid qualification for admission, gave her admission, allowed her to undergo the course, to write the examination and she has passed the examination also. The question therefore is whether at this distance of time when, on the basis of the result, the petitioner has obtained an employment also, there is any equity in denying the petitioner the benefits of the examination she has passed. Of course, even this court could not have countenanced the contentions of the petitioner if there was no evidence whatsoever to show that the Praveen examination of Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha is not equivalent to BA degree in Hindi. But fortunately for the petitioner going by Chapter XXXI of the Kerala Education Rules, a degree in Hindi or Praveen of Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha with a pass in the SSLC examination is equivalent qualification for the purpose of appointment as HSA in an aided school. Ext.P7
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008
- 8 -
mark list also shows that the standard of examination for the Praveen examination of Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha is equivalent to BA degree. That being so, I am of opinion that, it would be unjust to deny the petitioner the benefit of the examination which she has passed.
8. I am supported in this view by the decision in Shri Krishnan's case (supra) where in somewhat identical situation, the Supreme Court held that the petitioner therein who had undergone an examination without any fault on his part cannot be denied benefit of that examination. In this case, all throughout, the qualifications of the petitioner were verified by the Government and University authorities and nobody found anything wrong with the qualifications possessed by the petitioner. The University, who now seeks to cancel the petitioners examination, themselves verified the qualifications of the petitioner at the time of admission when the college forwarded the certificates after completing the admission.
W.P(C)No.1715 of 2008 - 9 -
That being so, I am satisfied that the petitioner cannot now be denied the benefit of the examination which she has written.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and it is declared that the petitioner has validly passed the B.Ed degree examination conducted by the Kannur University and she is entitled to keep the result of that examination. There would be a further direction to issue to the petitioner provisional and degree certificates as well as the mark list for the B.Ed examination. The provisional degree certificate and mark list shall be issued within a period of one month and the degree certificate in the usual course.
**S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE**
rhs
