Allowed

Aarathi a.R., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Feb 2021WP(C)/12340/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, OBC MBA students denied E-Grant Scholarship after a Government Order authorising such grants to OBC students was revoked. The High Court held that respondents are estopped from denying the benefit after the representation induced students to join the course.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; petitioners declared entitled to E-Grant Scholarships as per the cancelled Government Order for the duration of their studies.

Aarathi a.R., Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942

¶5

WP(C).No.12340 OF 2020(N)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 AARATHI A.R., AGED 21 YEARS D/O ANTONY, VALIYAVILA VEEDU, R.C STREET, AMARAVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶8

2 AKHILA S, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O SASIKUMAR, NEDIYAVILA VEEDU, MANANAKKU, PERUMKULAM P.O., ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

3 ANJANA D.R. AGED 23 YEARS, D/O REMANAN, ARUNIMA, OORUPOIKA P.O., MANAGATTUMOOLA, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶10

4 NIBIN SABU, AGED 22 YEARS S/O K.SABU, KAVIL VEEDU, AMBOORI, AMBOORI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

5 AROMAL.V, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O VASANTHA KUMAR, ROSARICE, THEKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM.

¶12

6 NISHAL NOUSHAD T.B, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O NOUSHAD T.B., NASEERAS, ERIPURAM, CHENGAL, PAYANGADI P.O., KANNUR.

¶13

7 SIVAPRASAD.M, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O MADHUSOODANAN.S, 12/349, KAIPALLIL THEKKETHIL, CHEPPAD.

¶14

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶15

: 2 :

¶16

8 VINILA ANIL, AGED 22 YEARS, D/O ANIL C.V, ULLARA HOUSE, PADMA VADAKKEPURAM, PADMA, KASARAGOD. 9 AKASH S, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O G.SATHIKUMAR, TC 17/406, PRASANNA NIVAS, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 10 SREEKUTTY M.T., AGED 23 YEARS, D/O MOHANDAS V, SREENILAYAM, AYILOOR, PERUMKADAVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 11 ANJANA S.KUMAR, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O SURESHKUMAR V, TC 52/762, ANJANA BHAVAN, POOZHIKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 12 RAJEEV K.J, S/O JEEVARAJAN K, 9/111, KALLARAMKETTIL, MEENANGADI, KARACHAL, WAYANAD. 13 AKSHAY K SHIBU, TC 24/53, PONKULAM, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 14 NITHIN WILSON W.C. AGED 22 YEARS S/O WILSON K, W.C.BHAVAN, THATHIYOOR, MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 15 ANANTHU KRISHNA A.S, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O ANILKUMAR K, GOPIKA NIVAS, MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 16 AKSHAYA ASHOK, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O ASOKAN K.K., 9/95, KANDAPPAMKUNDIL, CHOMBALA P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN-673308.

¶17

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶18

: 3 :

¶19

17 ANAND G.S, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O SHYAMLAL S.S, KRISHNA BHAVAN, VENPALAVATTOM, ANAYARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶20

18 RAVI KRISHNAN. K, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O J.KRISHNAKUMAR, SUNVIEW VILLA, I.A PEYAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶21

BY ADVS. SRI.V.R.GOPU SHRI.J.NARAYANA PILLAI

¶22

RESPONDENTS:

¶23

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶24

2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO TOURISM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶25

3 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO BACKWARD CLASS, DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶26

4 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO SC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶27

5 KERALA INSTITUTE OF TOURISM AND TRAVEL STUDIES (KITTS), REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, RESIDENCY COMPOUND, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN-695 001.

¶28

SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER(SC/ST) SRI M.K. ROBIN RAJ

¶29

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No.12340/2020

: 4 :

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2021

¶35

The petitioners, who are MBA (Travel and Tourism) students in the 5^th respondent-Kerala Institute of Tourism and Travel Studies (KITTS), are before this Court aggrieved by the action of the respondents in denying E-Grant Scholarship to the petitioners.

¶36

The petitioners state that they belong to OBC category. The petitioners are coming from backward classes

¶37

and are not capable of payment of huge semester fees levied by the 5^th respondent. The respondents were extending E-Grant Scholarship to students belonging to OBC categories. On an expectation that the petitioners who belonging to OBC also would receive such E-Grant Scholarship, the petitioners jointed MBA (Travel and Tourism) Course conducted by the 5^th

¶38

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶39

: 5 :

¶40

respondent-Institute. Four students belonging to OBC had received E-Grants for the MBA (Travel and Tourism) Course during the year 2018-2020.

¶41

On 11.07.2019, the Principal of the 5^th respondentInstitution issued Ext.P3 Circular stating that students of MBA Course belonging to SC/ST/OBC, OBC(H)/OEC are entitled to get fees exemption by way of E-Grants from the SC/ST Development Department and therefore all steps for above purpose to be taken through Akshaya Kendras. The Joint Secretary to Tourism Department had also issued Ext.P1 Government Order dated 06.02.2019 in which it was stated that the students belonging to OBC category joined the 5^th respondent-Institution will be getting fees concession from the Department concerned.

¶42

The petitioners joined the Course on the expectation that fee concession will be granted to them. However, subsequently, the Government issued Exts.P11 and P16 orders whereby it was made clear that the students belonging to OBC categories are not entitled to the benefit of

¶43

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶44

: 6 :

¶45

fee concession. It is under these circumstances that the petitioners have approached this Court seeking to set aside Exts.P11 and P16 Government Orders and to declare that the petitioners are entitled to get E-Grants Scholarship as provided under Ext.P1 Government Order.

¶46

The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the action of the respondents denying E-Grants Scholarship to the petitioners is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners are coming from poor families and are incapable of payment of fees of ₹45,000/- per semester. The petitioners joined the Course only because the respondents represented that the students of OBC category are entitled to E-Grants Scholarship. Now, the respondents cannot turn around and say that the promise made was a mistake and the petitioners are not eligible for E-Grants.

¶47

The 1^st respondent filed counter affidavit and defended the writ petition. The 1^st respondent stated that on the basis of a proposal dated 04.10.2018 received from the 5^th respondent-Institution, the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P1 order

¶48

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶49

: 7 :

¶50

revising the fee structure of BBA (Tourism Management) and MBA (Travel and Tourism) Courses conducted by the 5^th respondent-Institution. The prospectus and notification published by the 5^th respondent did not make any promise to the students belonging to OBC. The petitioners have joined the Course relying on the Prospectus, which did not indicate that the petitioners will be eligible to any type of fee concession.

¶51

Issuance of Ext.P1 Government Order was by a mistake, inasmuch as the students belonging to OBC category were not eligible for fee concession. As soon as the mistake came to notice, the Government issued Ext.R1(b) order dated 16.03.2020 and Ext.P16 order dated 17.06.2020 making it clear that the students belonging to OBC are excluded from the purview of E-Grants. Any direction of this Court to extend E-Grant to the petitioners would cause huge financial liability upon the respondents. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, contended the 1^st respondent.

¶52

The 3^rd respondent filed a counter affidavit. The 3^rd respondent stated that based on a mistakenly issued

¶53

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶54

: 8 :

¶55

Government Order, the ineligible OBC students cannot be granted educational/financial benefits. The Director of Backward Classes Development Department has issued Ext.P8 letter to the 3^rd respondent requesting to cancel Ext.P1 with immediate effect since it is against the Government policies/order dealing with the disbursement of Scholarship. The 3^rd respondent further stated that a high level meeting was convened in the presence of Hon'ble Minister of Backward Classes Development to discuss the issue. It was thereafter decided to rectify the mistake. Accordingly, Ext.P11 order was issued cancelling the financial benefits given to the OBC students studying for MBA and BBA Courses in the 5^th respondent-Institution. The petitioners therefore cannot claim educational concession as of right.

¶56

The 5^th respondent also filed a counter affidavit. The 5^th respondent stated that except students belonging to SC/ST, OEC and equivalent categories, fee is being collected from eligible students belonging to all other categories and the concession is refunded to the students concerned on receipt

¶57

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶58

: 9 :

¶59

of E-Grants from Government. Four students out of six OBC category students of the MBA Batch 2018-2020 who applied for E-Grants for the second year, received E-Grants from the SC Development Department. Since the OBC students of the previous Batch (MBA 2018-2020) received E-Grants, the petitioners also applied for E-Grants.

¶60

The Principal of the 5^th respondent-Institution forwarded their application to the SC Development Department. However, the Government has now taken a decision that OBC category students are not to be granted E- Grant benefits. The 5^th respondent stated that it is a Self Financing Institution and any direction to pay E-Grants to ineligible candidates will cause huge financial burden which the 5^th respondent will not be able to shoulder. The 5^th respondent further stated that instructions have already been received directing the 5^th respondent to effect recovery of E- Grant benefits given to ineligible OBC students.

¶61

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Special Government Pleader (SC/ST) for the

WP(C) No.12340/2020

: 10 :

respondents.

It is admitted by either side that OBC students of the academic year 2018-2020, who have joined the Course in question, have received the E-Grant benefits. The Joint Secretary to the Department of Tourism issued Ext.P1 Government Order. Ext.P1 Government Order, inter alia , provides that OBC students, who have joined the Travel and Tourism Course in the 5^th respondent-Institution, are entitled to educational concession. Ext.P1 further goes to state that the Government have considered this issue in detail and Ext.P1 order is being issued giving the detailed fees structure. Ext.P1 further directed the Director of the 5^th respondent to make available E-Grant to eligible students.

¶66

Therefore, going by the convention of extending E-Grant facility to OBC students and also by Ext.P1 Government Order, OBC students like the petitioners also should be made entitled to E-Grants.

¶67

The contention of the learned Special Government Pleader is that Ext.P1 was issued by a Department of the

¶68

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶69

: 11 :

¶70

Government which was not competent to issue an order in that nature and it is for that reason that Ext.P1 order has been withdrawn/corrected by issuing Ext.R1(b) order dated 16.03.2020 and Ext.P16 order dated 17.06.2020. The petitioners cannot claim fee concession to which they are not otherwise eligible, on the basis of an erroneous Government Order issued by the respondents, which admittedly stands cancelled.

¶71

The learned Government Pleader further argued that the petitioners have already remitted the full semester fee for the Course and therefore they cannot contend that they are financially not in a position to pay the requisite fee on their own.

¶72

It is to be noted that the petitioners joined the Course at a time when other OBC students in the 5^th respondent-Institution were receiving E-Grant facilities for the same Course. The petitioners joined the Course after issuance of Ext.P1 order which represented that OBC students like the petitioners will be eligible for educational

¶73

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶74

: 12 :

¶75

concession. Thus, the Government have made a promise by representation to the petitioners. Therefore, the respondents

¶76

are estopped from going back from the stand and holding that the petitioners will not be extended with E-Grant facilities.

¶77

It may be true that Ext.P1 order is issued erroneously by the Government and the Government have a right to cancel or vary Ext.P1 order. The Government have, in fact, varied Ext.P1 Government Order by issuing Ext.P16. But, that should not disentitle the petitioners who are OBC students who have joined the Course based on the practice followed by the 5^th respondent-Institution and promise made in Ext.P1 Government Order. This Court is of the considered opinion that the respondents are estopped from denying E-Grant benefit to the OBC students who have joined the Course subsequent to Ext.P1 and before the issuance of Ext.P11 order dated 28.03.2020.

¶78

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed. It is declared that the petitioners are entitled to E-Grant Scholarships as provided in Ext.P1

¶79

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶80

: 13 :

¶81

Government Order for the duration of their studies in the 5^th

¶82

respondent-Institution.

¶83

Sd/-

¶84

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/16.02.2021

WP(C) No.12340/2020

: 14 :

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶90

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GO(GENL)	NO
	51/2019/TOURISM OF DEPARTMENT TOURISM DATED 6.2.2019	OF
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO 4415/2020 OBTAINED FROM THE DEPART OF DISTRICT SCHEDULED C DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAP THOROUGH RIGHT TO INFORMATION 2005, DATED 4.6.2020	B4- MENT ASTE URAM ACT
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.7.2019	BY
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONERS WHO ENTITLED TO GET E-GRANTS SCHOLAR INCLUDING THE BANK ACCOUNT NUM DATED NIL	ARE SHIP BERS
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OBOO119070067451 AND THE RELE	NO. VANT
	PORTION OF BANK ACCOUNT OF PETITIONER DATED NIL	5TH
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO K TVM/MBA/2019-20 DATED 14.1.2020	ITTS
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER N GRANTS/KITTS/2019-20 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 5.2.2020	O.E- 4TH
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BCDIR/B2/6/2020(1) DATED 1.2.2020	NO.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTA SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINI FOR TOURISM DEPARTMENT DATED 6.2.20	TION STER 20
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION NO.2239	OF
	19TH SESSION OF 14TH KE	RALA
	LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY DATED 11.3.202	0

¶91

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶92

: 15 :

¶93

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(GENL) NO 27/2020/BCDD DATED 28.3.2020 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO 313/A2/2020 KSYC SENT TO 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.6.2020 EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA DATED 11.6.2020 EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF MESSAGES DATED 5.6.2020 EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION LETTER NO 387/INTIMATION TO PARENTS OBC/MBA 2019-21 ISSUED BY THE 5TH DEFENDANT DATED 17.6.2020 EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF GO (GENL) NO 197/2020/TOURISM OF TOURISM DEPARTMENT DATED 17.6.2020

¶94

RESPOND	ENTS' EXHI	BITS:
EXHIBIT	R3(a):	A TRUE COPY OF THE THE PROSPECTUS OF M ISSUED BY THE FIFTH YEAR 2018.	RELEVANT PAGES BA AND BBA COUR RESPONDENT FOR	OF SES THE
EXHIBIT	R3(b):	A TRUE COPY OF THE THE PROSPECTUS OF M ISSUED BY THE FIFTH YEAR 2019.	RELEVANT PAGES BA AND BBA COUR RESPONDENT FOR	OF SES THE
EXHIBIT	R5(a):	TRUE COPY OF NO.50/2009/SCSTDD DA	THE G.O. TED 02/07/2009.	(P)
EXHIBIT	R5(b):	TRUE COPY OF NO.102/2019/TOURISM	THE G.O.( DATED 11/03/201	RT) 9.
EXHIBIT	R5(c):	TRUE COPY OF NO.KITTS/OBC/MBA/201 09/08/2019.	THE LET 9 DA	TER TED
EXHIBIT	R5(d):	TRUE COPY OF THE PR ON MADHYAMAM DAILY O	ESS RELEASE ISS N 26/05/2019.	UED

¶95

WP(C) No.12340/2020

¶96

: 16 :

¶97

EXHIBIT R5(e):	TRUE REMITT	COPY ANCE O	OF F TH	THE DETAILS OF FEE E PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT R5(f):	TRUE 05/03/	COPY 2020	OF GIV	THE DETAILS DATED EN BY THE FIFTH
	RESPON QN.NO.	DENT 2239.	FOR	ANSWERING THE LA
EXHIBIT R5(g):	TRUE DATED	COPY 02/07/	OF 2020	LETTER NO.B4-26755/19 .
EXHIBIT R1(a):	TRUE 04.10.	COPY 2018	OF	THE LETTER DATED
EXHIBIT R1(b):	TRUE 16.03.	COPY 2020	O	F DIRECTION DATED

¶98

Aarathi a.R., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aarathi a.R., 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

P.Jayagovind Vs Bijoy Prabhakaran Pulipra(Resolution Professional)

Sreedharan P.K. Vs State of Kerala

A.K.Anjana Vs Smt.Saudamini

Alectrona Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Abdul Muthaleef Vs Pudunagaram Grama Panchayat

T.D.Raveendranathan Kartha Vs N.Sujaya