This single-line order dismissed a writ petition challenging the mandatory online option confirmation clause of the KEAM 2017 Prospectus. The court held the clause was in conformity with the constitutional scheme and without merits.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2017/22ND ASHADHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 22958 of 2017 (T)
PETITIONER:
GOURI P.NAIR, AGED 17 MINOR, D/O.ANJANA, LEELA BHAVAN, PNRAE7, PONGUMMUDU, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 011, THE PETITIONER BEING MINOR IS REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER, PRAVEEN KUMAR, AGED 46, S/O.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, LEELA BHAVAN, PNRAE7, PONGUMMUDU, MEDICAL COLLEGE.PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
BY ADVS.SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.P.K.JANARDHANAN SRI.K.N.CHATHUKUTTY
RESPONDENTS:
1. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION(CEE), OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION(CEE), HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.MANU
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 22958 of 2017 (T)
APPENDIX
| PET P1 |
ITION : |
ERS' EXHIBITS: TRUE COPY OF MARK STATEMENT OF SENIOR SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION 2017. |
|---|---|---|
| P2 | : | TRUE COPY OF THE ADMIT CARD OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION FOR ADMISSION TO ENGINEERING/PHARMACY COURSES. |
| P3 | : | TRUE COPY OF RANK DETAILS OF PETITIONER FOR ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE WHICH IS UNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF KEAM 2017. |
| P4 | : | TRUE COPY OF THE OPTION LIST OF COURSES AND COLLEGE EXERCISED BY PETITIONER DATED 25.6.2017. |
| P5 | : | TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 30.6.2017 FOR FIRST PHASE ALLOTMENT OT ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE COURSES 2017. |
| P6 | : | TRUE COPY OF THE ALLOTMENT MEMO DATED 30.6.2017 TO PETITIONER. |
| P7 | : | TRUE COPY OF LIST OF CANDIDATES WHOSE ALLOTMENTS IN THE FIRST PHASE CONFIRMED AND ELIGIBLE FOR HIGHER OPTIONS IN WHICH THE NAME OF PETITIONER ALSO FIGURE DATED 30.6.2017. |
| P8 | : | TRUE COPY OF FEE RECEIPT DATED 3.7.2017. |
| P9 | : | TRUE COPY OF ALLOTMENT MEMO DATED 10.7.2017. |
| P10 | : | TRUE COPY OF PRESS RELEASE OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5.7.2017. |
| P11 | : | TRUE COPY OF NEWS ITEM DATED 7.7.2017 PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY. |
| P12 | : | TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED 5.7.2017 FOR SECOND PHASE OF ALLOTMENT OT ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE/PHARMACY COURSES - 2017. |
| P13 | : | TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF CLAUSE 11.6.4 OF PROSPECTUS KEAM 2017. |
| P14 | : | TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 10.7.2017 BY PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| RES | PONDE | NTS' EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// |
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
W.P.(C) No.22958 of 2017
Dated 13th July, 2017.
J U D G M E N T
Clause 11.6.4 of the Prospectus published by the second respondent, the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations of the State for admission to professional courses, is under challenge in the writ petition.
WPC No.22958 of 2017
2
Engineering College, Thiruvananthapuram. Clause 11.6.4 of the prospectus provides that candidates who are having valid options and who are willing to participate in the second allotment/subsequent allotment have to log in to his/her option registration page and confirm their options by clicking the 'confirm' button available in his/her option registration page. The said clause also provides that the candidates can delete their unwanted options or alter the priority of existing options after exercising the online option confirmation. The petitioner did not log into her option registration page and confirmed her higher options by clicking the 'confirm' button. Consequently, she has not been considered for allotment in the subsequent phases of the allotment process. The petitioner, therefore, challenges the said clause in this writ petition.
WPC No.22958 of 2017
3
“11.6.4. Online Option Confirmation for participating in subsequent phases of allotment:
Candidates who are having valid options and who are willing to participate in the second allotment/subsequent allotment have to log in to his/her Option Registration Page and confirm their options by clicking the ‘Confirm’ button available in his/her Option Registration Page. Candidates can delete their unwanted options or alter the priority of existing options only after the online option confirmation.
Online Option Confirmation is mandatory before each phase of allotment for participating in that particular phase of allotment. The facility for Online Option Confirmation will be made available in the website before each phase of allotment. A candidate who does not confirm the higher order options by clicking the Confirm button available in his/her Option Registration Page, his/her higher order options belongs to the course(s) included in that phase will not be available in subsequent phases also. However, his/her existing allotment shall be retained, subject to the conditions of clause 11.6.2 and 11.6.3.”
As evident from the clause extracted above, online option confirmation is mandatory before each phase of allotment for participating in that particular phase of allotment. It also cl arifies that a candidate, who does not confirm the higher
WPC No.22958 of 2017
4
order options by clicking the 'confirm' button available in his/her option registration page, his/her higher order options belonging to the course(s) included in that phase will not be available in subsequent phases also. The case of the petitioner is that the requirement in the said clause that the candidates who want to participate in the second/subsequent allotments shall log in to his/her option registration page and confirm their options by clicking the 'confirm' button irrespective of the fact whether the candidates are changing the options exercised preceding the first phase of allotment, is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The learned counsel for the petitioner elaborated this case of the petitioner contending that insistence of confirmation for students who do not want to change their options, is unnecessary and hence arbitrary.
WPC No.22958 of 2017
5
registration page and confirm their options by clicking the confirmation button. Having accepted the terms and conditions of the prospectus and having secured an allotment by participating in the allotment process, the petitioner cannot, at this stage, be permitted to challenge the provisions contained in the prospectus. Further, it is explicit that such a requirement is incorporated in the prospectus for the purpose of ascertaining whether a candidate who got an allotment is interested in exercising the higher options for simplifying the further process of allotment in the interests of the candidates. In the said view of the matter, according to me, the impugned clause is in conformity with the constitutional scheme. The writ petition, in the circumstances, is without merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
tgs
(true copy)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Clause 11.6.4 of the KEAM 2017 Prospectus mandating online option confirmation to participate in subsequent allotment phases is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Const
Gouri P. Nair (represented by Praveen Kumar)
Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education
Commissioner of Entrance Examination (CEE)
P.B. Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
