Dismissed

K.R.Raja, S/O.K.Rajendiran, v. the Chairman, Board of Llb

Madras HC3 Oct 2016WP(MD)/18276/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a differently abled person, challenged the rejection of his LL.B. admission application due to his designation as a private candidate in +2 marks. The court directed him to produce school certificates by 05.10.2016 and ordered the respondents to accept his application and permit his participation in counselling upon receipt of such documents.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to produce school certificates by 05.10.2016; respondents to accept application and permit participation in counselling.

K.R.Raja, S/O.K.Rajendiran, Vs the Chairman, Board… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.10.2016

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶6

Writ Petition(MD)No.18276 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) No.13167 of 2016

¶7

K.R.Raja ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Chairman, Board of LLB 3 year Degree Admissions – 2016 – 17, The Tamilnadu DR.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028.

¶10

2.The Registrar, The Tamilnadu DR.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028.

¶11

3.The Director of Legal Studies, Office of the Director of Legal Studies, Millers Road, Kilpakkam, Chennai. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to reconsider the candidature of the petitioner for 3 years LL.B. Degree course for the academic year 2016-2017 (Application No.A31606299) at once.

¶13

For Respondents 1 – 2 : Mr.R.Parthiban

¶14

For 3^rd Respondent : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government Advocate

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing

¶17

¶18

Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Advocate for 3^rd respondent.

¶19

By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶20

The petitioner filed the Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to reconsider the candidature of the petitioner for 3 years LL.B. Degree course for the academic year 2016-2017 (Application No.A31606299) at once.

¶21

4.According to the petitioner, he is a differently abled person. He studied +2 course in the Government Higher Secondary School, Devapandalam, Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District as a regular student staying for 4 years in the Government run Hostel. He passed Higher Secondary Course in the year 2002 with minimum marks, then he applied for improvement. At the time of applying for improvement, he has submitted the original mark sheet issued by the department and wrote the improvement examination as a private candidate, and obtained good marks. Subsequently, he completed Bachelor Degree in Philosophy in Madras University, Master Degree in Social Work from Pondicherry Central University and M.A. Criminology & Police Administration in Manonmaniam Sundaranar University. Now, he applied for 3 years LL.B Course with the respondents 1 and 2 for the academic year 2016-2017. But, unfortunalely, respondents 1 and 2 rejected the application on the ground that in the +2 mark sheet he is shown as private candidate, so he is not eligible to apply for admission to LL.B Course. Clarifying his position, he made a representation dated 12.09.2016 to the respondents 1 and 2, but the same was not considered. Hence, he filed the writ petition.

¶22

5.Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought to my notice the typed set of papers filed along with the Writ Petition regarding the transfer certificate issued by the Government Higher Secondary School, Devapandalam. It shows, the petitioner completed the Higher Secondary Course in the said School in the year 2002, he also take me through the certificate issued by the said school that he studied +2 in the said school during 2000-2002. So far as the original mark sheet issued by the Department, the petitioner submitted that, he has submitted the same to the authorities while he wrote his improvement examination and it is not available with him.

¶23

6.In the above circumstances, petitioner is directed to produce the above transfer certificate and certificate issued by the Government Higher Secondary, Devapandalam before the respondents 1 and 2 on or before 05.10.2016. On such certificates https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ being produced, respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the same, and accept his application and permit him to participate in the counselling on the appointed day in accordance with law.

¶24

¶25

7.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/-

Assistant

Registrar (CO)

/True Copy/

Sub Assistant Registrar sj To 1.The Chairman, Board of LLB 3 year Degree Admissions – 2016 – 17, The Tamilnadu DR.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028. 2.The Registrar, The Tamilnadu DR.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028. 3.The Director of Legal Studies, Office of the Director of Legal Studies, Millers Road, Kilpakkam, Chennai. +2 cc to M/s R.ALAGUMANI,Advocate, Sr.No: 58230 +1cc to M/S Special Government Pleader, Sr No.58283 JAM/GSV-PM/04.10.2016/SAR 3 /3P-7C

¶31

W.P(MD)No.18276 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) No.13167 of 2016

¶32

03.10.2016

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.R.Raja, S/O.K.Rajendiran, v. the Chairman, Board of Llb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R.Raja, S/O.K.Rajendiran, v. the Chairman, Board of Llb

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

S. Pathmanaman, Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

V.Ammal Vs the District Collector

Ebros, Rep. by Its Partner Vs the Assistant Inspector

V.Balu, S/O.Venkata Ramanuja- Vs the District Collector

Rm.Subbiah Pillai, Vs the Inspector General of

T.Subbiah, Vs the Sub Collector