Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Petitioner vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Dec 14, 2016
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1186456

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.M.P. No. 37086 of 2016 in W.P. No. 34265 of 2016
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Petitioner

Respondent

Respondent

Excerpt

.....those failed students to take up the supplementary examination, they will be put to serious hardship. in any view of the matter, they would not claim any equity on the basis of writing the examination pursuant to the directions of this court. in fact, the earlier order of this court, it has been very clearly stated that pursuant to the interim order only, they have been permitted to write the examination. in such view of the matter, no prejudice would be caused either publishing the results or permitting the failed students to take up the supplementary examination.4. learned counsel appearing for the university would contend that in the earlier order itself, it is stated that pursuant to the interim order, the students cannot claim any equity out of this order.5. mr.madanagopal rao, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 would also state that they need to file a detailed counter in the main writ petition.6. heard both sides.7. since the last date for supplementary examination is 13.12.2016 without fine and with fine, the last date is 16.12.2016, unless result is published, the failed students cannot take up the examination. however, the next examination, as admitted by all the parties, would be only november 2017 and since it is only the first year course and the course completion is 4 years, there is no impediment for permitting the authority either to publish the result of the examination or permit the students to sit and write the supplementary examination.8. considering the facts and circumstances, this court directs the respondent nos.4 and 5 to declare the result of 1st year bhms examination 2015-2016 and permitting the students, who have failed in any subjects to apply for the supplementary examination to be held on 16.12.2016. it is made clear that the students, who write the supplementary examination, should get the results and pursuant to the order of this court, they cannot claim any equity out of this order and this order is made, subject to the.....

Full Judgment

1. Mr.J.Madanagopal Rao, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 and

2.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the direction of this Court in W.P.No.34265 of 2016, the students were permitted to write the examination and the results are ready for publish. The supplementary examination schedule has also been published. But due to the earlier order of this Court, the results have not been published. These are the first year students. Total duration of the course is 4-1/2 years. But the result is not published for the present year. He would further state that if the results are not published, the failed students cannot take up the supplementary examination, which is commencing from 26.12.2016. But the last date for submitting on line application, without fine is till 13.12.2016 and with fine is 16.12.2016. So first of all, these students should know whether they have passed and if they have failed, they have to take up the supplementary examination.

3. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would only contend that unless the result is published, so as to enable those failed students to take up the supplementary examination, they will be put to serious hardship. In any view of the matter, they would not claim any equity on the basis of writing the examination pursuant to the directions of this Court. In fact, the earlier order of this Court, it has been very clearly stated that pursuant to the interim order only, they have been permitted to write the examination. In such view of the matter, no prejudice would be caused either publishing the results or permitting the failed students to take up the supplementary examination.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the University would contend that in the earlier order itself, it is stated that pursuant to the interim order, the students cannot claim any equity out of this order.

5. Mr.Madanagopal Rao, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 would also state that they need to file a detailed counter in the main writ petition.

6. Heard both sides.

7. Since the last date for supplementary examination is 13.12.2016 without fine and with fine, the last date is 16.12.2016, unless result is published, the failed students cannot take up the examination. However, the next examination, as admitted by all the parties, would be only November 2017 and since it is only the first year course and the course completion is 4 years, there is no impediment for permitting the authority either to publish the result of the examination or permit the students to sit and write the supplementary examination.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court directs the respondent Nos.4 and 5 to declare the result of 1st year BHMS Examination 2015-2016 and permitting the students, who have failed in any subjects to apply for the supplementary examination to be held on 16.12.2016. It is made clear that the students, who write the supplementary examination, should get the results and pursuant to the order of this Court, they cannot claim any equity out of this order and this order is made, subject to the result of the main writ petition.

9. Post the main writ petition on 09.01.2017.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial