A writ petitioner sought to appear in the Save A Year examination to clear a failed English paper. The High Court held that the petitioner belonged to a category ineligible under the governing notification and dismissed the petition to prevent injustice to other students.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932
WP(C).No. 15707 of 2010(K)
PETITIONER(S):
JUSTINE ABRAHAM, S/O. DANIEL ABRAHAM, EDATHIL PUTHENPARAMBIL, CHANGANKERY, EDATHVA.P.O, ALAPPUZHA - 689 573.
BY ADV. SMT.V.VIJITHA
RESPONDENT(S):
ST. ALOYSIUS HSS, EDATHUA, ALAPPUZHA.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANDESH RAJA-R1, R2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).NO.15707/2010
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P2: Notification No.EX-II(1)/53388/HSE/2009 dated 12.5.2010.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
R2(a):True copy of the relevant pages of the order No.EX:II(1) 53388.HSE.09 dated 27.10.2009.
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
W.P.(C). NO.15707 OF 2010
Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner underwent Higher Secondary course in the year 2005 – 2006 and then, appeared for the regular examination in the year 2006. However, he could clear only two papers out of the six papers. Thereafter, the petitioner went abroad for taking up employment. On his return, he registered his name for appearing in the Higher Secondary examination which was scheduled to be conducted in March, 2010. He took the said examination with Registration No.2900385. Though he had appeared for four papers, he could clear only three of them. He had failed in English. The contention of the petitioner is that thereafter, he was anxiously awaiting the notification for the Save A Year Examination. Ext.P2 dated 12.5.2010 is the notification issued by the Government for that purpose. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner approached the third respondent for getting the application form to register for the SAY and improvement examination, June 2010 with a view to clear English paper, the only paper left for clearance. However, he was informed that he would be ineligible
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010
2
for appearing in the SAY Examination. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner.
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010
3
conspicuous absence of the category to which the petitioner belongs as a group eligible to appear for the SAY examination. In support of the said contention, the respondents have produced Ext.R2(a) order along with the counter affidavit. It would reveal that persons who had undergone the Higher Secondary course prior to 2006-07 fall under SCHEME-3 category. Admittedly, the petitioner underwent the Higher Secondary Course in the academic year 2005-06 and therefore, undoubtedly belong to SCHEME-3 category. In respect of the SCHEME-3 category, Ext.R2(a) order Ex:II(1) 53388/HSE/2009 dated 27.10.2009 was issued earlier. The said document was made available by the learned Government Pleader during the course of argument. It is stated as follows in the said notification: “ This shall be
the last examination under this scheme.” If a candidate under SCHEME-3 appearing for the said last examination failed to become eligible for higher studies he/she should again join the higher secondary course for pursuing his /her studies under the new scheme. Candidates belonging to the said category was also informed that in case of their failure to clear all the papers and became eligible for higher studies they would have to join higher secondary course under the new grading system. Admittedly, the petitioner belongs to SCHEME-3 category. When once
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010
4
category to which the petitioner belongs is identified his eligibility to appear for the SAY examination depends upon the eligibility clause in Ext.P2 notification dated 12.5.2010. A scrutiny of Ext.P2 would reveal that the category to which the petitioner belongs viz., SCHEME-3 is not one among the categories eligible to appear for the SAY examination to be conducted in June 2010. In other words, it would reveal that the category to which the petitioner belongs has not been enlisted under Ext.P2 as an eligible category. If that be so, merely because the petitioner has registered for the Higher Secondary Examination, March, 2010 cannot and will not fetch any eligibility to him to appear for the SAY examination to be held in June 2010 as the eligibility to appear for the said examination is governed by clause relating eligibility given in Ext.P2. Granting permission to the petitioner alone in such circumstances would amount to injustice to the other students who belong to the same category since SCHEME-3 category are not at all eligible under Ext.P2 to appear for the SAY examination to be held on 14.6.2010. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to appear for the SAY examination. The petitioner could not bring to my attention any provision in Ext.P2 notification that confers a legal right on the petitioner to appear
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010
5
for the SAY examination to be held in June 2010. Therefore, there is no merit in the contentions of the petitioner and the Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
spc
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010
6
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
W.P.(C). NO. /2010
JUDGMENT
June, 2010
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a student from the SCHEME-3 category, who failed to clear the Higher Secondary examination, is eligible to appear in the Save A Year examination for the year 2010.
Justine Abraham
State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary, Department of Higher Secondary Education
The Director, Directorate of Higher Secondary Education, Thiruvananthapuram
The Principal, St. Aloysius HSS, Edathua
C.T. Ravikumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
