Greeshma Sonny vs The Commissioner For Entrance
2021 Latest Caselaw 6045 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

 FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942

                   WP(C).No.26678 OF 2019(H)


PETITIONER:

              GREESHMA SONNY,
              AGED 19 YEARS,
              D/O.SONNY THOMAS,
              RESIDING AT MUTHALAKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
              MOONNILAVU P.O.,
              KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686586.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
              SRI.R.REJI
              SMT.THARA THAMBAN
              SRI.B.BIPIN
              SRI.ARUN BOSE

RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
              EXAMINATIONS KERALA,
              HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 5TH FLOOR,
              HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,
              SANTHI NAGAR,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695001.

     2        MES DENTAL COLLEGE,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
              PALACHODE P.O.,
              KOLATHUR VIA,
              MALAPARAMBA,
              PERINTHALMANNA,
              MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679338.

     3        THE REGISTRAR,
              MES DENTAL COLLEGE, PALACHODE P.O.,
              KOLATHUR VIA,
              MALAPARAMBA,
              PERINTHALMANNA,
              MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679338.
 WP(C) No.26678/2019
                             :2 :


       4      STATE OF KERALA,
              REP. BY SECRETARY,
              HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE,
              SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

              R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH
              R1 & 4 BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI M.A.ASIF

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.26678/2019
                                 :3 :




                            JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking

to direct the respondents to release the original marklists of

Class X and XII of the petitioner along with the originals of

Migration certificate, Transfer Certificate and Fitness

Certificate and ₹1 lakh collected by the 1 st respondent towards

admission fee.

2. When this writ petition came up on 01.11.2019, this

Court passed an interim order directing respondents 2 and 3

to release to the petitioner the originals of her marklists as

also Migration Certificate, Transfer Certificate and Fitness

Certificate, on her furnishing a Bank Guarantee of ₹4 lakhs.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant

to the interim order, a Bank Guarantee has been given by the

petitioner and the original documents sought for by the WP(C) No.26678/2019

petitioner has been returned by the College.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would urge

that the petitioner wanted to discontinue the course and

intimated her desire to the 1st respondent on 12.09.2019 as

per Ext.P3 e-mail. Subsequent representations were also

made. The admission process was closed on 15.09.2019 as

evidenced from Ext.P6. As the petitioner had expressed her

desire to leave the course before closure of the admission,

liquidated damages cannot be realised from the petitioner.

5. The statement filed by the Government would show

that the Government could download Ext.P3 e-mail

communication only after 15.09.2019, after the closure of the

admission. The learned Government Pleader wold submit that

₹1 lakh collected by the 1st respondent towards admission fee

has already been remitted back to the College on 22.10.2019.

6. The issue involved in this writ petition is whether

the petitioner has sought to leave the Course before the

closure of the admission process. Even if the petitioner

contends that she has sent e-mail much prior to the closure of WP(C) No.26678/2019

the admission, the statement filed by the 1 st respondent would

reveal that the e-mail sent by the petitioner could be

of fact which this Court cannot entertain in a proceeding under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. The petitioner has an effective remedy for the

redressal of her grievance through the Admission Fee

Regulatory Committee.

In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed

of permitting the petitioner to approach the Admission Fee

Regulatory Committee for agitating her grievance with

appropriate application, within a period of three weeks. To

enable the petitioner to approach the Admission Fee

Regulatory Committee and in the interest of justice, the interim

order passed by this Court on 20.01.2021 will continue to

enure to the benefit of the petitioner for a period of four weeks.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/19.02.2021 WP(C) No.26678/2019

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BDS ALLOTMENT MEMO DATED 30.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF GO (MS) NO.102/2019/H&FWD DATED 08.07.2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 12.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE POSTAL RECEIPT.

EXHIBIT P5 THE E-MAIL DATED 14.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6            TRUE   COPY    OF   THE  LETTER  DATED
                      26.09.2019     ISSUED   BY   THE   1ST
                      RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R2 A          A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED

28/8/2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR SPOT ADMISSION

EXHIBIT R2 B A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KEAM 2019 PROSPECTUS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

SR