Disposed

Sreedevi.K v. Calicut University

Kerala HC17 Jan 2022WP(C)/916/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking admission to LLB course at Government Law College Thrissur after missing spot admission. Court directed Principal to consider petitioner's representation for vacant seat in accordance with law and rules.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 3rd respondent to consider the Ext.P4 representation for admission to LLB Course in accordance with law and rules; Principal at liberty to decide in consultation with University.

Sreedevi.K Vs Calicut University — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 916 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SREEDEVI.K, AGED 20 YEARS, D/O. VINOD MOHANAN, KADHALIKKATTIL HOUSE, THEKKUMKARA P.O, THRISSUR-680 589

¶8

BY ADVS.

¶9

SHERRY J. THOMAS JOEMON ANTONY

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 CALICUT UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, TIRUR-CALICUT ROAD, THENHIPALAM, KERALA-673 635.

¶12

2 THE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF ENTRANCE COMMISSIONER, 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, SS KOVIL ROAD, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 001

¶13

3 THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, THRISSUR, LAW COLLEGE ROAD, MADONA NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003

¶14

SRI.P.G.PRAMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R1 BY SRI.P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.916/2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 17^th day of January, 2022

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to direct the 3^rd respondent to admit the petitioner to 3 year LLB Course at the 3^rd respondent-College and direct the 1^st respondent to regularise the admission accordingly.

¶21

The petitioner states that she is an aspirant to higher education and she applied for the Kerala Law Entrance Examination conducted by the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner secured Rank at 610. The petitioner had given option to study in Government Law College, Thrissur. But, unfortunately, the petitioner did not get admission in any Government Law College. The petitioner appeared for the spot admission but even then the petitioner was not admitted.

¶22

The petitioner submits that after the completion of admission procedure, there is a seat vacant in the 3^rd

¶23

WP(C).No.916/2022

¶24

¶25

respondent-College. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation before the Principal, Ext.P5 representation before the Registrar of the University of Calicut and Ext.P5(a) representation before the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations for getting admitted to the vacant seat of 3 year LLB in the 3^rd respondent-College. However, they have not responded to the representation. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 2 and 3.

¶27

The learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st

¶28

respondent submits that no candidate can be admitted to a Course after the last date stipulated for admission or after expiry of condonable period, taking into account the attendance requirements. Therefore, the petitioner may not satisfy the requirements under the academic regulations.

¶29

WP(C).No.916/2022

¶30

¶31

However, this Court do not propose to enter into any finding in that regard. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation before the 3^rd respondent. In such circumstances, the 3^rd respondent can take a decision on Ext.P4 representation in accordance with law and in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable in the matter.

¶32

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner for admission to 3 year LLB Course in the College, in accordance with law and taking into consideration the applicable rules and regulations governing the matter. The 3^rd respondent-Principal will be at liberty to take a decision in consultation with the 1^st respondentUniversity.

¶33

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

¶34

¶35

WP(C).No.916/2022

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 916/2022

¶38

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

Exhibit P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
	PAGE ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE CANDIDATE DATA SHEET ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE 2ND RESPONDENT OFFICE
Exhibit P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT COLLEGE TO ANOTHER STUDENT
Exhibit P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT COLLEGE DATED 29-12-2021
Exhibit P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29-12-2021
Exhibit P5A	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29-12-2021
Exhibit P5B	THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 30-12-2021

Sreedevi.K v. Calicut University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreedevi.K v. Calicut 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

Shiyas Vs the State of Kerala

Kilma I.K., Vs Dr.v.P.Joy

Thomson Lawrence Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited (Ksfe)

Aji Kochuparambil Vs Sanjay Kaul

Sofiya.C.a Vs State of Kerala

K.O.George, Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer