Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

REJI MATHEW VARGHESE, S/O.T.M.VARGHESE versus MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


REJI MATHEW VARGHESE, S/O.T.M.VARGHESE v. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY - WA No. 2390 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 3854 (19 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 2390 of 2006()

1. REJI MATHEW VARGHESE, S/O.T.M.VARGHESE,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
... Respondent

2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,

3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,

4. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,

5. THE PRINCIPAL,

For Petitioner :SMT.S.MUMTAZ

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.V.K.BALI The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :19/12/2006

O R D E R

V.K.Bali,C.J. & S.Siri Jagan,J.

W.A.No.2390 of 2006

Dated, this the 19th day of December, 2006



JUDGMENT

V.K.Bali,C.J. (Oral) The challenge in the present Writ Appeal is to the order dated 15th November, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.28977 of 2006. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and examined the records of the case. We have also carefully gone through the impugned judgment. It is not in dispute that if the rule on the basis of which the matter has been disposed by the learned Single Judge, may apply, the appeal is only to be dismissed. Counsel for the appellant, however, contends that the rule made applicable by the learned Single Judge is not applicable to professional courses. When, however, questioned as to what rule in that case would be applicable to professional courses relevant to the petitioner, counsel is not able to answer. If the rule that has been made applicable is to govern the field, the natural consequence would be that he would fail and that the writ petition has to be W.A.No.2390 of 2006 - 2 - dismissed. If that rule is not applicable and there is no rule which may govern the field with regard to revaluation, then the original award of marks shall have to be confirmed by which the petitioner would fail. No merits. Dismissed. V.K.Bali Chief Justice S.Siri Jagan Judge vku/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.