Adithyan Binu Nambiar vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 23185 Ker

Kerala High Court

Adithyan Binu Nambiar vs State Of Kerala on 2 August, 2024

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
        FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946
                        WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

              ADITHYAN BINU NAMBIAR
              AGED 18 YEARS
              S/O BINU ODAYAMMATATH "DWARAKA",
              NEAR OLD POST OFFICE ROAD, PAYYAMBALAM,
              KANNUR, PIN - 670001

              BY ADVS.
              NAVEEN T.
              CHITHRA CHANDRASEKHARAN
              V.S.ABHISHEK
              BIJI A MANIKOTH

RESPONDENTS:

    1         STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
              HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
              GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
              PIN - 695001

    2         THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS
              KERALA, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
              EXAMINATIONS, THAMBANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
              PIN - 695001

              BY ADVS.
              ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
              SRI.P.G.PRAMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER(GP-50)
              ADV NISHA BOSE -SR GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024
                                    2


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a candidate who secured 623 marks in

NEET-2024. He also participated in Kerala Engineering Architect

Medical Entrance - 2024 (KEAM 2024). However, later, it came

to the notice of the petitioner that, while submitting the choices of

courses, MBBS course was omitted to be incorporated in the

application, by mistake. The last date of submission for application

was 19.06.2024, and the petitioner came to know about the

mistake only recently. Thereupon, the petitioner made a request

before the 2nd respondent to permit him to make necessary

additions in the application by incorporating the MBBS course as

well, which was declined vide Ext.P4 dated 29.07.2024. This writ

petition was submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances

seeking the following reliefs:

"i) issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P4 and quashing the same.

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to provide a chance to the petitioner to add MBBS Course as additional Course for allotment in KEAM-2024.

WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

Iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to allow the petitioner to remit the requisite fees for opting MBBS Course as additional Course for allotment in KEAM-2024.

iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to get a chance to exercise option to add MBBS Course as additional Course for allotment in KEAM-2024.

v) to dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language.

vi) and grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including costs."

2. A statement has been submitted by the learned

Government Pleader opposing the prayer sought by the petitioner.

It was averred that, even though the period of submitting the

application was initially fixed as 17.04.2024, it was ultimately

extended up to 19.06.2024. Moreover, the first phase of allotment

has to start on 14.08.2024 and the publication of provisional

category list is scheduled on 02.08.2024 and the final list is to be WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

published on 05.04.2024. It is also averred that, if the students

are offered the opportunity to add courses again, the following

process are to be followed:

"• Time for Course addition • Time for Payment for course addition • Document verification • Scrutiny of these documents • Super Scrutiny of the documents • Publishing of defects memo for these documents • Time for uploading the correct documents • Scrutiny of the updated documents again • KIRTADS verification • Category provisional list Publishing"

Therefore, it was pointed out that, if the petitioner is permitted to

make additions, at this point of time it will affect the entire process.

3. Heard Sri.Naveen T., learned Counsel for the

petitioner and Smt.Nisha Bose, learned Senior Government

Pleader for the respondents.

4. Even though the learned Counsel for the petitioner

submitted that it was only an omission on the part of the petitioner,

in submitting the application, the learned Senior Government

Pleader submits that, such an opportunity cannot be given.

Moreover, the learned Senior Government Pleader also placed WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

reliance upon a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this

Court in W.A. No.1427/2020, wherein this question was

considered elaborately and found against the petitioner therein

with a specific finding that, after the cut off date, such corrections

cannot be permitted to be carried out.

5. I have carefully gone through the records. On going

through the judgment relied on by the learned Senior Government

Pleader, I find that, that same was passed in similar

circumstances. The learned Counsel for the petitioner made an

attempt to distinguish the same on the facts by pointing out that, in

the said case, the writ petition was submitted on the date of

counselling, whereas in this case, even the provisional rank list is

yet to be published. Therefore it was contended that, the

circumstances under which the judgment rendered in W.A.

No.1427/2020 were different and therefore the same cannot be

treated as a precedent as far as the case advanced by the

petitioner is concerned.

6. However, in paragraph 27 and 28 of the said

judgment, it has been specifically observed as follows:

WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

"27. Allotment proceedings for Medical and Allied Courses on the basis of NEET (UG) - 2020 would be over by 06.11.2020, which means that the process due for enlisting, for admission to Medical and allied courses, has already commenced, and scheduled to be completed by 05.11.2020. As rightly observed by the writ court, interpolation at this stage, by giving an opportunity to a candidate, who has failed to exercise the option, would amount to altering the conditions in the prospects, which this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot do.

28. It is trite to say that, prospectus and notifications issued by the Government, binds all the parties, including the appellant. If option is not exercised in time, then, there is no right to demand, consideration of the application, or to exercise option, at any time, at the will of a candidate. Time schedule, in terms of the prospectus and notifications, issued from time-to-

time, have to be strictly adhered to by all. Consequences for not exercising the option, need not be specifically stated."

On going through the aforesaid observations, it can be seen

that, a clear declaration has been made by the Division Bench of

this Court to the effect that, if the option is not exercised by a

candidate in time, there is no right to demand consideration of the

application or to exercise the option at any time at the will of the

candidate. In the light of the aforesaid observations which are

binding on this court, I do not find any reason or scope to take a

different view in the matter. As far as the factual distinction sought WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

to be drawn by the petitioner is concerned, it is discernible from

the judgment referred to above that, that was only one of the

considerations which culminated in the ultimate conclusion,

whereas the finding was to the effect that, once the candidate fails

to exercise the option within the time provided further extension

cannot be granted.

Therefore, I do not find any reason to entertain this writ

petition.. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs WP(C) NO. 27266 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27266/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION CONTAINING APPLICATION NO.

240410120882 OF NEFT 2024 DATED 12-2-

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SCORE CARD OF THE NEFT-2024 OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE APPLICATION NO. 1223549 DATED 11-4- 2024 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.

CEE/494/24-TA5 DATED 29-7-2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER