Partly allowed

Sreekumar P v. M G University

Kerala HC14 Jan 2016WA/2672/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged the dismissal of a petition seeking to regularize a minor student's admission due to untimely fee payment. The High Court held that while university procedures must be followed, the matter must be regularized in the interests of justice since the Court had already directed fee payment and allowed provisional appearance.

What did the court decide?

The University was directed to regularize the admission of the second petitioner to the B.Com course.

Sreekumar P Vs M G University — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/24TH POUSHA, 1937

¶6

WA.No. 2672 of 2015 () IN WP(C).35141/2015 -------------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 35141/2015 DATED 04-12-2015

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS IN THE WP(C) :-

¶8

1. SREEKUMAR P MAYOORAM, PANCODE POST, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

2. SABARINATH.S

¶10

S/O.SAREEKUMAR.P, MAYOORAM, PANCODE POST ERNAKULAM REP BY THE IST APPELLANT FATHER AND GUARDIAN

¶11

BY ADVS.SMT.K.PUSHPAVATHI

¶12

SMT.NITHYA SASI

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WP(C) :-

¶14

1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REP BY ITS REGISTRAR, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶15

2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶16

3. PRINCIPAL SREESANKARA VIDYAPEETOM COLLEGE, SREESANKARAPURAM VALAYANCHIRANGARA P.O., PERUMBAVOOR - 683 556.

¶17

R1 & R2 BY SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC

¶18

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-012016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

jvt

¶20

WA.NO.2672 OF 2015

¶21

APPENDIX APPELLANTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :-

¶22

ANNEXURE R1(a) : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA 2616/2015. ANNEXURE R1(b) : TRUE COPY OF ORDER No.7219/AC BVI/1/2015 DATED 11TH DEC.2015.

¶23

ANNEXURE R1(c) : TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CAP MONITORING COMMITTEE HELD ON 11TH DECEMBER, 2015.

¶24

ANNEXURE R1(d) : TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR No.Ac.A1/3/2640/2006 DATED 9/11/2006.

¶25

ANNEXURE R1(e) : TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR No.Ac.A1/3/2114/2008 DATED 6/11/2008.

¶26

//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶28

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶29

W.A. No.2672 of 2015

¶30

Dated this the 14^th day of January 2016

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

Shaffique, J.

¶33

This writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioners challenging the judgment dated 4.12.2015 in W.P.(C) No.35141 of 2015.

¶34

The writ petition was filed by the first petitioner as father and guardian of the second petitioner, who was a minor. The second petitioner was undergoing B.Com course with Computer Application at the Sree Sankara Vidhyapeetom College affiliated to the first respondent University. Though the second petitioner had remitted the necessary fee in the College, the University fee could not be remitted in time. As a result of the same, by Ext.P6, the request for permission to remit the fee due to University was rejected. The second petitioner was also not permitted to remit the required fee for the First Semester examination and to attend the same. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs :-

¶35

W.A. No.2672 of 2015

¶36

-: 2 :-

¶37

“i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P6.

¶38

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ directing the respondents to permit the 2^nd petitioner to remit the required fee of 1^st semester examination and to attend the semester examination.”

¶39

The learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration the factual issues involved in the matter, observed that since the University have insisted on uploading the details of admitted candidates on the date of admission itself, the said procedure had to be followed and in so far as in the case on hand, there was failure on the part of the 2^nd petitioner to remit the fee and sent his details online before the cut off date, he is not entitled for any relief and accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.

¶40

When the matter came up for admission, we have passed an interim order directing the 2^nd petitioner to deposit the University fee in the Bank and produce the receipt before the College authorities and a further direction to forward the same to the University. We had also permitted the 2^nd petitioner to provisionally appear in the First Semester B.Com with Computer Application examination, which was commenced on 14.12.2015.

¶41

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the 2^nd petitioner had already remitted the required fee as

¶42

W.A. No.2672 of 2015

¶43

-: 3 :-

¶44

directed by this Court and had already attended the First Semester Examination.

¶45

The learned Single Judge was justified in observing that the procedure prescribed by the University has to be strictly followed. Having regard to the factual situation involved in the matter and since by virtue of the interim order, we had already permitted the 2^nd petitioner to remit the University fee, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, the admission of the 2^nd petitioner has to be regularised, which, however, shall not be treated as a precedent.

¶46

In the result, we dispose of the writ appeal modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge to the extend directing the University to regularise the admission of the 2^nd petitioner to the aforesaid course.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE

¶49

Sd/A.M. SHAFFIQUE J UDGE

¶50

Jvt/15.1.2016.

Sreekumar P v. M G University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekumar P v. M G University

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

M.N.Jomy Vs Kerala State Electricity Board.

State of Kerala Vs Kerala Land Development Co.Employees

State Bank of Travancore Vs Shaleel Khan M.S.

V.P.Aboobacker Vs the Department of Local Self Govt.

A.Alavikutty Vs Bank of India

V.Ramachandran Vs the Chairman, Kerala State Pollution Control Board