Court holds that students under suspension lacking requisite attendance and without proper applications cannot be permitted to appear; intra-court appeal under Kerala High Court Act maintainable against such interlocutory order.
The Kerala High Court Division Bench, comprising Justices Anil K. Narendran and Muralee Krishna S., on November 3, 2026, overturned an interim order passed by a Single Judge that had permitted suspended students of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit to appear in the ensuing university examinations scheduled from November 4, 2026.
The students, who were placed under suspension pending disciplinary enquiry for alleged incidents on August 13, 2026, had moved the High Court seeking directions to allow their participation in the examinations despite the suspension. The Single Judge had, by an interim order dated October 30, 2026, directed the University to accept their examination fees and permit them to write the exams, subject to the final outcome of the writ petition.
However, the University challenged this order through a writ appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958. The Division Bench observed that the students had failed to comply with mandatory attendance requirements prescribed under the relevant University Regulations, which ranged from 75% to 80% depending on the course. Further, none of the students had submitted applications for condonation of attendance shortage within the stipulated time and in the prescribed manner, including necessary recommendations and supporting medical or documentary evidence.
The Court emphasized that the writ petition lacked pleadings and material to establish the students' eligibility to appear for the examinations, such as minimum attendance, internal examination pass criteria, and compliance with the examination notification. It reiterated settled legal principles that courts cannot direct statutory authorities to act contrary to regulations, and that interim relief amounting to final relief can only be granted in rare and exceptional cases with a very strong prima facie case, which was absent here.
Citing precedent decisions including Bharat Singh v. State of Haryana and Principal, IES College of Engineering v. Anas P.M., the Court held that where attendance shortage results from a valid suspension order, permitting students to write exams despite non-attendance would render the penalty ineffective and reward misconduct.
Further, the Division Bench clarified the scope of intra-court appeals under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, holding that an appeal lies against interlocutory orders that substantially affect the rights or liabilities of parties. The impugned interim order substantially affected the University's rights, thus the appeal was maintainable.
Consequently, the Division Bench set aside the Single Judge's interim order directing the University to permit the suspended students to appear in the examinations. The Court made it clear that its observations were limited to the appeal disposal and did not decide the main writ petition merits.
This judgment reinforces the principle that academic regulations, including attendance and disciplinary sanctions, must be strictly adhered to and that courts should not bypass procedural safeguards or regulatory norms through interim orders.
Bottom Line:
University examinations - Students under suspension cannot be permitted by interim order to appear in examinations contrary to attendance regulations and without requisite pleadings or applications for condonation - Intra-court appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act is maintainable against such an interlocutory order when it substantially affects rights of the University.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 226, Section 5(i) of Kerala High Court Act, 1958, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, University Regulations on attendance and examination eligibility
