Disposed

Priya P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Sept 2014WP(C)/12549/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged Communication No.B11/6147/2011 and sought refund of admission fees. Court held that respondents had reconsidered the matter and ordered a refund via an order dated 15.10.10.2012, so there was no reason to proceed, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as respondents had already ordered a refund of fees via an order dated 15.10.2012.

Priya P. Vs State of Kerala — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/11TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 12549 of 2012 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

PRIYA P., D/O.SUBULAKSHMI, SABARI, T.C.17/2139, DR.PAI ROAD, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 012.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN - 695 001.

¶11

2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

¶12

3. LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLGOY, NANDAVANAM, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PIN - 695 033.

¶13

4. THE PRINCIPAL, LBS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR WOMEN, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN - 695 012.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LOWSY.A. R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.LEO GEORGE,SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sts

¶17

WP(C).NO.12549/2012

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT.P-1	TRUE COPY OF THE ALLOTMENT MEMO DATED 29.08.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P-2	TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT SLIP DATED 18.08.2011 SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS.65,000/- TOWARDS ADMISSION FEE.
EXT.P-3	TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.20217 DATED 24.10.2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P-4	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 31.10.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P-5	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.B11/6147/2011 DATED 30.12.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P-6	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.4781/J1/12/H.EDN DATED 13.02.2012 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P-7	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.TA 1/729/2012/CEE DATED 09/07/2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXT.R3(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR THE YEAR 2011.
EXT.R3(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CEE/1717/2010/KEAM-2011/TAI DATED 28/09/2011 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.R3(C)	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CEE/1717/2010/KEAM-2011/TAI DATED 7/10/2011 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.R3(D)	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT).NO.1675/11/H.EDN DATED 19/10/2011

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶27

========================

¶28

W.P.(C). No. 12549 of 2012

¶29

¶30

Dated this the 2^nd day of September, 2014

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:

¶33

“i. Call for the records leading to Ext.P5 from the 3^rd respondent and quash the same by the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari.

¶34

ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding respondents 3 and 4 to refund the amount collected from the petitioner by way of fees and liquidated damages in connection with the admission of the petitioner for the engineering Course under the 3^rd respondent in the year 2011.

¶35

iii. Declare that petitioner is entitled to get the refund of fees and liquidated damages remitted by the petitioner with the 4^th respondent since petitioner discontinued the studies in the LBS Institute of Technology for Women Poojapura, Thiruvananthapuram before the closing of the admissions for the year 2011.”

¶36

The reliefs sought are strongly opposed from the part of

¶37

respondents 3 and 4, who have filed a statement seeking to sustain the course of action in not refunding the amount payable to the petitioner. The specific case of the petitioner is that, the

¶38

W.P.C. No. 12549 of 2012 -2-

¶39

petitioner had applied for Transfer Certificate and came out of the 3^rd respondent institution much before closure of the admission and that, the 3^rd respondent has admitted two more students thereafter, as conceded in their statement itself, which forms the basis for claiming refund of the fees paid by the petitioner for securing admission in the Management quota.

¶40

Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, it is brought to the notice of this Court that respondents 3 and 4 have reconsidered the matter and have passed an order bearing No. B11/6147/2011 dated 15.10.2012 whereby refund has been ordered to be given to the petitioner. In the said circumstance, this Court finds no reason to proceed with the matter.

¶41

The submission is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶42

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶43

kp/-

Priya P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.K.Biju Vs P.Shajahan

Dr.Rekha U.S. Vs State of Kerala

R. Dakshayani (Retd. Principal) Vs the Administrator

K.M Abdul Latheef Vs Mr.M G Rajamanikyam

Radha Vs the District Collector

Gokul.P.G. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board