Vijayan vs The Vice Chancellor
2024 Latest Caselaw 5232 Ker

Kerala High Court

Vijayan vs The Vice Chancellor on 15 February, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 6016 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          VIJAYAN
          AGED 54 YEARS
          S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, PROPRIETOR, VIAJA CONSTRUCTIONS,
          BHAGYASREE VILLA, KALLELIBHAGOM POST,
          KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690519
          BY ADV SEBASTIAN JOSEPH (KURISUMMOOTTIL)


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE VICE CHANCELLOR
          COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (CUSAT) ,
          UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, KOCHI,
          PIN - 682022
    2     THE REGISTRAR
          COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (CUSAT),
          UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, KOCHI,
          PIN - 682022
    3     THE UNIVERSITY ENGINEER
          ENGINEERING D EPARTMENT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE
          AND TECHNOLOGY (CUSAT), UNIVERSITY ROAD, SOUTH
          KALAMASSERY, KOCHI, PIN - 682022
          SHRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 6016 OF 2024                2

                               JUDGMENT

Amidst the various assertions, averments and allegations in this writ

petition, when this matter was called today, the learned counsel for the

petitioner, confined his plea that the 1st respondent - Vice Chancellor be

directed to take up Ext.P7 representation and dispose it of, within a time

frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. Sri.Aravindakshan Pillai - learned Standing Counsel for the

respondents, submitted that though he has reservations as to whether

Ext.P7 is maintainable before the 1st respondent, if this Court is only

inclined to direct the said Authority to consider the same, adverting to

such objection also, then he would not stand in the way of Ext.P7 being

ordered to be taken up and disposed of by the 1st respondent; but prayed

that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations on the

entitlement of the petitioner to any relief and leave it to be decided by the

competent Authority, in terms of law.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and direct the

1st respondent to take up Ext.P7 representation of the petitioner and

dispose of the same, after affording him and any other person who may be

interested an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an

appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is

possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment.

I, however, make it clear that I have not entered into the merits of

any of the rival contentions, including the question of maintainability of

Ext.P7 before the 1st respondent; and that all these are left open to be

decided by the said Authority, while the afore exercise is completed.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/16.2

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6016/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 12/01/2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 08/02/2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/03/2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01 /04/2022 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/04/2022

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATE 26/05/2022 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/