Allowed

Zephyr Entrance Coaching Centre, v. Kerala State Youth Commission

Kerala HC9 Apr 2024WP(C)/32597/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenged the Kerala State Youth Commission's order directing an entrance coaching centre to refund Rs.40,000 in fees. The court held the Commission lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the validity of a private contract and quashed the order, allowing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P4 order of the Youth Commission directing refund of Rs.40,000 quashed; no costs.

Zephyr Entrance Coaching Centre, Vs Kerala State… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 32597 OF 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ZEPHYR ENTRANCE COACHING CENTRE, KUNNUMPURAM, AYURVEDA COLLEGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SUNIL KUMAR.V, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.P.VISWANATHAN NAIR.

¶8

BY ADVS. G.P.SHINOD RAM MOHAN.G.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 KERALA STATE YOUTH COMMISSION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695003, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 ABDULLA.A, S/O.ANSAR, HAMEEDIYA STORE, MARKET JUNCTION, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 541.

¶12

3 THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695001.

¶13

4 THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695001.

¶14

BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER IMAM GRIGORIOUS KARATT

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 32597 OF 2018

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The present Writ Petition impugns Ext.P4 order passed by the Kerala State Youth Commission. By the impugned order, the petitioner has been directed to refund an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards fees collected from the candidate for the entrance coaching programme conducted by the petitioner.

¶20

I have heard Sri.Govind Padmanabhan - learned

¶21

counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶22

The Kerala Youth Commission Act, 2014 (for short 'the Act') was enacted by the State Government on 13.02.2014. The purpose of the said enactment and also the constitution of the Commission as evident from the preamble of the said Act reveals that it is constituted for the upliftment

¶23

of youth in the State of Kerala. The powers and responsibilities of the Commission is clearly defined in terms of Section 9 of the Act. Reading of Section 9 (2)(a) of the Act shows that the Commission shall have primarily responsibility

¶24

for the upliftment and protection of the youth and also prevent any exploitation of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution or any other law for the time being promulgated

¶25

WP(C) NO. 32597 OF 2018

¶26

¶27

by the State Government. The enquiry so conducted by the Commission shall be communicated to the Government in the form of a representation or other appropriate action or relief.

¶28

When the powers of the Youth Commission is thus analysed and applied on the facts of this case, it is explicitly clear that it does not have the jurisdiction and authority to inquire into a validity of a contract entered into between the

¶29

parties. When the party respondents chose to enrol themselves to any coaching programme run by the petitioner, they submit themselves voluntarily to such programme based on the terms and conditions entered into between the parties. The validity of those agreements cannot be judged by the Youth Commission and any such decision in this regard will be ultravires to Act under which it was constituted and in excess of powers conferred on them. This being a position of law, I find that Ext.P4 order is per se illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶30

Accordingly, the same is quashed and the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.

¶31

Sd/- EASWARAN.S JUDGE

¶32

lsn

¶33

WP(C) NO. 32597 OF 2018

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32597/2018

¶36

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶37

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY IN TO BETWE SECOND RESPO	OF THE AGRE EN THE PETITI NDENT.	EMENT ONER	ENTERED AND THE
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COP	Y OF THE COM	PLAIN	T DATED
	24.11.2016 RESPONDENT RESPONDENT.	SUBMITTED BY BEFORE	THE THE	SECOND FIRST
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY THE PETITI RESPONDENT.	OF THE REPLY ONER BEFORE	SUBMI THE	TTED BY FIRST
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE CO 20.01.2018 RESPONDENT.	PY OF THE ISSUED BY	ORDER THE	DATED FIRST

¶38

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶39

TRUE COPY

¶40

P.A TO JUDGE

¶41

LSN

Zephyr Entrance Coaching Centre, v. Kerala State Youth Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zephyr Entrance Coaching Centre, v. Kerala State Youth Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Th President Vs the State of Kerala

A.Harirajan Vs Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

P.v.Subran Vs the Chairman and Managing Director, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Jin Mathew Vs the Director

Aneesh B.Nair Vs the Principal, Government Law College

Sujith Y. Vs Institute of Management in Government (Img)