Muhammad Binshad N.K.(Minor) vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 23285 Ker

WP(C) NO. 25826 OF 2021        1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 25826 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

    1     MUHAMMAD BINSHAD N.K.(MINOR)
          AGED 17 YEARS, S/O. JAFAR N.K,
          NADUVILAKALATHIL HOUSE, CHERANI, KARUVAMBRAM P.O.,
          NARUKARA VILLAGE, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
          PIN- 676 123, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER JAFAR N.K.,
          AGED 41, NADUVILAKALATHIL HOUSE, CHERANI,
          KARUVAMBRAM P.O., NARUKARA VILLAGE, ERNAD TALUK,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 123.


RESPONDENTS:
    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
          GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

    2     DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
          HOUSING BOARD BUILDING SANTHI NAGAR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001, REPRESENTED BY
          DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION.

    3     DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
          DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
          HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

    4     THE COORDINATOR,
          ICT CELL (HIGHER SECONDARY WING),
          SCERT GUEST HOUSE CAMPUS, POOJAPPURA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 012.

    5     REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
          DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, B2 BLOCK,
          CIVIL STATION, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM 676 505.

    6     SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
          PALEMAD P.O., EDAKKARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
          PIN-679 331, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
 WP(C) NO. 25826 OF 2021           2



     7       GOVT. BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANJERI,
             COURT ROAD, KACHERIPPADI, MANJERI P.O.,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 679 331,
             REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL.

     8       PRINCIPAL,
             GOVT. BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANJERI,
             COURT ROAD, KACHERIPPADI, MANJERI P.O.,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 676 121.


             SMT. NISHA BOSE, SR. GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   25.11.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 25826 OF 2021               3



                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a minor child and he is represented in this petition by

his father. He has approached this Court being aggrieved by the refusal on

the part of the respondents in granting allotment to the Plus One seat in the

8th respondent School.

2. The petitioner states that he passed his SSLC examination and

submitted an online application for admission to the Higher Secondary Course

for the academic year 2021-22. He sought admission in the Science Biology

Stream. He obtained allotment in the main allotment itself. Exhibit-P3 is the

2nd allotment result showing that the petitioner secured admission in the 6th

respondent School. The original records were submitted by the petitioner at

the time of admission itself. The parents of the petitioner noted that the 6th

respondent School was about 45 kms away from his residence. By way of

abundant caution, the parent approached an unaided School and sought

admission. Simultaneously, the petitioner applied for School transfer to the

aided/Government Schools situated near to the residential home of the

petitioner. The transfer allotment was granted and the petitioner was granted

admission in the 7th respondent School. In the said circumstances, the

petitioner went to the 6th respondent and demanded transfer certificate and

on its strength approached the 7th respondent School and took admission for

Plus One Bio Mathematics Group. Exhibit-P6 is the 'School wise admitted

students list' showing the name of the petitioner. He also remitted the

requisite fees in the 7th respondent School. The petitioner contends that

later that day, the 8th respondent informed the petitioner that the admission

details could not be entered in the Central Allotment Site since the petitioner

had taken admission in an unaided school. He contends that immediately

thereafter Exhibits-P8 to P10 representations were sent to respondents 2 to 5.

However, no action was taken. It is the case of the petitioner that as he has

already taken permanent admission in the main allotment, and as he had

secured transfer allotment through the Central Allotment System, the

respondents could not have refused admission on the ground that the

petitioner had secured admission in the unaided school. He contends that the

entire issue has happened due to flows in the software used by the

respondents for regulating the admission. It is in the afore circumstances that

the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

i) to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 2 to 5 and 7 and 8 to take immediate steps to enter admission details of the petitioner in the Single Window System for admission to the Plus One course.

3. When the matter had come up for admission, this Court taking

note of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as the learned Government Pleader had passed an order dated

18.11.2021.

"2. Sri.P.Shaijan Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner secured allotment to Plus One course as per Ext.P3. Ext.P4 is the permanent admission slip. However, since the allotted school was situated far away, the petitioner took admission in an unaided school. Simultaneously he submitted an application for transfer through the software. The transfer was granted and Ext.P5 is the transfer allotment letter. Ext.P6 is the list showing the name of the petitioner in the Central allotment list. The petitioner paid the fees and secured admission as is evident from Ext.P7. However, the Principal of the 7th respondent school is interdicted from uploading the details on the ground that the petitioner had secured admission in an unaided school when his application for transfer is pending.

3. Having considered the submissions, as an interim measure, there will be a direction to respondents 2 to 5, 7 and 8 to retain the seat of the petitioner secured as per Exhibit-P5 transfer allotment in the 7th respondent School for a period of two days. "

4. Later the matter came up for consideration on 19.11.2021 and the

following order was passed.

"When the matter was taken up, Smt.Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that after securing admission to the Plus One Course as per Exhibit-P3, the petitioner secured admission in an unaided school. The details of the admission taken by the petitioner was uploaded in the portal. It is for the said reason that the Principal of the 7th respondent school is unable to upload the details in the portal for the Single Window Admission.

2. In response, Sri.P.Shaijan Joseph, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner had submitted an online application through the Single Window Admission system and got admission to the Plus One Course in the main allotment itself. The petitioner also took admission in the 6th respondent school. This fact would be evident from Ext.P4. After securing admission, the petitioner applied for school transfer and got transferred to the 7th respondent school. This fact would be evident from Ext.P5 transfer allotment letter. It was owing to the fact that the 6th respondent school was situated a long distance away that by way of abundant caution, the

petitioner had approached an unaided school and had secured admission. The learned counsel would also refer to a Circular dated 03.11.2021 issued by the 1st respondent and it is submitted that the said Circular requires the student, who has obtained transfer allotment, immediately report to the School to which he has been transferred. The learned counsel contends that when the petitioner was granted allotment as per Exhibit-P2 and since the details of the petitioner was there in the portal itself, the unaided School ought not have been permitted to upload the details of the petitioner. This is a bug in the software, contends the learned counsel.

Having considered the submissions, I am of the view that the right of the petitioner to get allotment pursuant to Ext.P3 and P5 could not have been taken away solely on the ground that the petitioner had approached an unaided school and had secured admission. The respondents shall ensure that on unsustainable grounds, the transfer allotment granted to the petitioner is not interfered with.

The interim order will stand extended by ten days."

5. Based on the interim order so passed by this Court one seat has

been retained in the 7th respondent School.

6. I have heard Sri.Shaijan Joseph, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

7. In almost similar circumstances, this Court had occasion to

interpret the provisions of the prospectus brought out by the Government for

admission to Plus One Course. After considering all relevant aspects this

Court, in Exhibit-P11 order had occasion to hold that the restrictions in the

prospectus will be only to students who managed to obtain allotment during

the main allotment affected through single window system for admission to

Plus One course and the same will not be applicable to students who, left no

alternative, were forced to obtain admission in unaided schools. The order was

challenged by the State and a Division Bench of this Court while upholding the

order unequivocally held that conditions/restrictions in the matter of allotment

cannot have any application when the admission obtained by a student is in

the unaided Higher Secondary Schools, where the State Government has no

role to play in the allotment process.

8. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to succeed.

There will be a direction to the respondents 2 to 5 to initiate all steps that is

necessary to ensure that the admission details of the petitioner in the single

window system for admission to the Plus One course is uploaded by the 8th

respondent. The respondents 3 and 4 shall ensure that the 8th respondent

uploads the details without fail within a period of three weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of the judgment.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25826/2021

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE DATED 14.7.2021 ISSUED FROM GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ONLINE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF PRINT OUT SHOWING THE SECOND ALLOTMENT RESULT OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF PERMANENT ADMISSION SLIP DATED 16.10.2021 ISSUED 6TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF PRINTOUT SHOWING THE TRANSFER ALLOTMENT OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF LIST PUBLISHED IN CENTRAL ALLOTMENT SYSTEM SHOWING THE PURPOSE OF ISSUANCE OF TC TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 10.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 12.11.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.11.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.11.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN FLEMING SHAIJAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA (WPC NO. 23353/2021).

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WA NO. 1426/2021 (STATE OF KERALA VS FLEMING SHAIJAN).

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED 16.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR 2ND SUPPLEMENTARY ALLOTMENT.

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL