The petitioners are aggrieved with the alleged refusal to participate in the Practical examination of the Part II BDS final year examination conducted for the regular students of the final year BDS course. 2. The petitioners, admittedly, were students who were admitted to the BDS Course commencing in the year 2008. They completed the course in the year 2013. The petitioners appeared for the regular examination of Part II in the final year of the BDS course and failed in the examination. They subsequently appeared for the supplementary examinations conducted in August, 2014 for the papers in which they failed in the Part II examination, the results of which were published on 12.12.2014. However, the petitioners failed again. The petitioners' present claim is that the petitioners may be permitted to take part in the Practical examinations along with the regular batch students.
WP(C).No.34313 of 2014 - 2 -
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-University, however, submits that the Theory and Practicals have to be participated together and the marks of Theory and Practicals of the examinations conducted simultaneously would alone entitle a student to qualify in the examination. The contention is that students cannot appear for Theory examination at one time and Practicals in another and claim the marks to be taken, of the two separate examinations, to consider the eligibility for qualification. It is also submitted that the present Practical examinations are conducted for the regular students and the Theory papers are already over. The petitioners cannot be permitted for appearing in the Practical examinations for reason of their having not appeared in the Theory examinations along with the regular students. It is also submitted that a separate supplementary examination will be held for the additional students who have failed to qualify in the earlier years and the petitioners could only take part in the said examinations, simultaneously in Theory and Practicals.
WP(C).No.34313 of 2014 - 3 -
4. In the teeth of the above regulations, the petitioners cannot be permitted to appear for the Practical examinations; nor the same enure to the benefit of the petitioners, since the marks of the Practical examinations cannot be clubbed with the Theory papers already appeared or with the subsequent supplementary Theory examinations, which the additional students would be entitled to participate in. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merit.
5. However, it is directed that the University shall make every endeavour to conduct the supplementary examinations without delay.
The writ petition would stand dismissed; however, with the above observation/direction.
vku/-
Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge ( true copy )