Augustina Stephy vs Mahatma Gandhi University
2025 Latest Caselaw 4455 Ker

Kerala High Court

Augustina Stephy vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 24 February, 2025

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                                               2025:KER:15636


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1946

                    WP(C) NO. 27632 OF 2024

PETITIONER:

         AUGUSTINA STEPHY
         AGED 29 YEARS, W/O.HARISON,
         RESIDING AT VADAKKAKATH HOUSE,
         1/362(G), SNDP ROAD, ALANGAD,
         NEERICODE P.O., PIN - 683511.


         BY ADV ARJUN S.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
         REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI
         UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O.,
         ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686560.

    2    THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION,
         MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
         PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O.,
         ATHIRAMPUZHA,
         KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686560.

         BY ADV.SRI.SURIN GERGE IPE, STANDING COUNSEL

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP      FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.02.2025,      THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.27632 of 2024
                                :2:

                                                   2025:KER:15636



                         JUDGMENT

Dated this the 24th day of February, 2025

The petitioner is a LL.B. Degree Holder from the 1 st

respondent-University. Though she had passed all her

examinations successfully, the 1st respondent has not issued

consolidated mark list and Degree Certificate of the petitioner

even though she had applied for the same and made payment

as per Ext.P3.

2. The petitioner states that on various occasions

though the petitioner approached the respondents directly, no

action was taken by them to consider Ext.P3 application. Due to

the respondent's inaction, the petitioner lost her chance of

enrollment as an Advocate under Bar Council of Kerala which

was held on 27.07.2024. The petitioner made an application as

per Ext.P5 to the respondents to issue the consolidated mark

2025:KER:15636

list urgently which is pending before respondents, contends the

Counsel for the petitioner.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the

respondents.

4. The Standing Counsel submitted that during

the processing of the application of the petitioner for

consolidated marklist, it was found that the petitioner had not

passed two subjects namely (1) Civil Procedure Code of 1st

Semester (2) Constitutional Law of 2nd Semester. The petitioner

had appeared for the 1st Semester LLB Degree Examination,

March, 2022 and passed two out of the total five subjects.

Subsequently, she appeared for only one failed subject i.e.,

Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act in October 2022

Supplementary Examination and the petitioner secured 26

marks as external marks and 16 marks as internal marks. As

2025:KER:15636

per the Regulations, a candidate should secure a minimum of

30 marks for external examination with a minimum of 50 as

grant total, for passing the examination. In the case of the

petitioner, 4 marks were awarded by way of moderation

wrongly.

5. Moderation mark of Three Year University LLB

Program is allotted only for Semester pass. Moderation mark

should not have been distributed to get a paper pass. For the

Supplementary Examination, Constitutional Law-II in 2 nd

Semester Examination January, 2023, the petitioner scored 25

marks as external and 18 marks as internal. For that subject

also, moderation of 7 marks were erroneously granted to the

petitioner. The error was noticed only while processing the

request for consolidated marklist.

6. From the Examination Manual of the Mahatma

Gandhi University, Kottayam, I find that paragraph 8.8.2.1

2025:KER:15636

specifically provides that the benefit of moderation shall not be

given to enhance the marks of paper/papers of a Part held in a

previous year and already communicated to the candidates.

Going by the Examination Manual, the moderation marks

awarded to the petitioner is therefore erroneous.

In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is

disposed of directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to

appear for special examination in the subjects Constitutional

Law-Part-II and Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The

Examinations shall be conducted and results shall be published

on or before 31.03.2025.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams

2025:KER:15636

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27632/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit - P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/7/2021 FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PRINCIPAL, SREE NARAYANA LAW COLLEGE, POOTHATA.

Exhibit - P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 16/9/2022, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 5/12/2022, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 7/2/2023, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(c) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 24/3/2023, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(d) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 28/3/2023, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(e) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 7/8/2023, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit - P2(f) TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST DATED 11/9/2023, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.