MUHAMMED NAZIM RAFIQ v. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGANMONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY 2012/12TH POUSHA 1933WPC.No. 35176 of 2011 (V) PETITIONER(S) 1. MUHAMMED NAZIM RAFIQ, S/O.RAFIQ, NASNAZ, CHOMBALA P.O., KOZHIKODE DT PIN - 673 308. BY ADV.SRI.E.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S) 1. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN - 673 636. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, PAREEKSHA BHAVAN, THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, PIN - 673 636. BY ADV. SRI. SANTHOSH MATHEW, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON02-01-2012 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:svs W.P.(C). NO. 35176/2011APPENDIXPETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:P1:COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REVALUATION OF ANSWER PAPERSOF THE B TECH THIRD SEMESTER EXAMINATION 12/2010.P2:COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 06/12/2011 FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE FOR REVALUATION.P3:COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REVALUATION OF ANSWER PAPERSOF THE B TECH SIXTH SEMESTER EXAMINATION.P4:COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 20/09/2011 FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE FOR REVALUATION.P5:COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REVALUATION OF ANSWER PAPERSOF THE B TECH SEVENTH SEMESTER EXAMINATION.P6:COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 11/07/2011 FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE FOR REVALUATION AND PHOTOCOPY.RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL/TRUE COPY/P.A. TO JUDGE.svs S. Siri Jagan, J.=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=W.P(C) No. 35176 of 2011=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Dated this, the 2nd day of January, 2012.J U D G M E N TThe petitioner completed his B. Tech. Course. Dissatisfiedwith the results of certain papers, the petitioner has filed Exts.P1, P3 and P5 applications for revaluation of the answer papers. The petitioner seeks expeditious completion of the revaluationprocess.2. I have heard the standing counsel for the Universityalso, who submits that the University would require at least twomonths to complete the revaluation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of thiswrit petition with a direction to the respondent to see that therevaluation for which the petitioner has submitted Exts. P1, P3and P5 applications, is completed and results thereof published, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 6 weeks from thedate of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.