The petitioner was a student of the BA (Economics) under the Calicut University, which was a course comprising six semesters. The petitioner admittedly, failed in two papers in the 4th semester. The petitioner appeared in the supplementary examinations of the 4th semester, held in October 2014, ie., held along with th e6th semester exams. The petitioner seeks for expeditious valuation of the answer papers. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that considering the volume of examinations and the large number of students appearing for the regular and supplementary examinations, the University has given preference to the valuation of the papers of the students, who have appeared in the final semester examinations regularly, since, in their case, they would be denied of a W.P.(C) No.29531 of 2014 - N 2 year, if the results are not published immediately. The supplementary examinations are taken by students who have once appeared and failed in exams. Hence the priority given to candidate who diligently pursue their studies and pass exams in the 1st scheme cannot at all be forwarded upon.
3. The University has kept the valuation of the supplementary examinations of the earlier years pending in order to expedite publication of regular exam results. The University contends that they require atleast four months time to complete the valuation. In such circumstance, despite the grievance of the petitioner that he would be denied of an admission, which he had obtained provisionally, subject to production of mark list, this Court cannot issue any positive direction, considering the circumstances placed before this Court by the University.
4. It is also to be noticed that the petitioner was a person, who had once failed in the regular examination and appeared in the first supplementary examination. The W.P.(C) No.29531 of 2014 - N 3 petitioner's prayer is only for expeditious valuation of the answers papers of the second supplementary examination, in which he had participated. No equity can be extended to such persons and this Court cannot direct the University to pick out individual papers and value it ignoring the priority given to the regular students. The fact remains that when the petitioner got himself admission in the higher graduate course, which he is now studying, he was not qualified and the admission was only provisional. Petitioner also does not have a case that his regular exam results, which too he completed in 2014, has not been published.
The writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and stands dismissed.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB