Kerala High Court
Adhil. T. Jaleel vs Director Of General Education on 17 October, 2024
2024:KER:77103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TH
THURSDAY, THE 17 DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 25TH ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 32345 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
ADHIL. T. JALEEL,AGED 23 YEARS
S/O JALEEL. T.A. THURATHEPARAMBIL, HOUSE, M.H.
JUNCTION, PONJASSERY P.O , PERUMBAVOOR., PIN -
683547
BY ADVS.
C.G.BINDU
AJITHA C.G.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695014
2 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL LINES
KAKKANNAD, ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682030
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY IT'S CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695014
OTHER PRESENT:
Adv.V.K Sunil, Sr.G.P
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.C No. 32345 of 2024
2
2024:KER:77103
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is an aspirant for admission to the DELEd
course, is aggrieved by the denial of admission to the petitioner.
The case of the petitioner is that, in the admission process
conducted by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner became qualified
and he claimed admission under OBC quota set apart for Muslim
community. Even though he participated in the interview held on
12th, 13th and 14th of September 2023 in Government Higher
Secondary School, Edappally, he could not secure admission.
Later, admissions were closed on 30.10.2023. The case of the
petitioner is that, even after the closure of the admissions on
30.10.2023, three seats are vacant. Therefore, the petitioner
approached the authorities concerned seeking admission to the
vacant seats which was declined and this writ petition was
submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances seeking the
following reliefs.
"1. A writ in the nature of Certiorari or other appropriate Writ to call
for the records and quash ExtP6 to the extent it is against the
2024:KER:77103
petitioner by rejecting his application submitted before the
NAVA KERALA SADASSU.
2. A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ
or order directing the respondents to take immediate
favourable action on ExtP5 and P7 representations of the
petitioner in order to admit the petitioner forthwith.
3. A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ
directing the 1st respondent to place before this Hon'ble Court
the actions taken by him pursuant to the intimation of 2nd
respondent as borne out from ExtP6. 4. A writ in the nature of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to
the 2nd respondent, in the event of granting admission to the
petitioner, a lenient view may be taken in the case of internal
marks by awarding nominal mark as well as for attendance.
5. To grant such other relief or reliefs by this Hon'ble Court which
are deemed just and necessary.
6. Dispense with the production of English translation of vernacular
documents.
7. Award exemplary cost to the petitioner"
2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instruction,
submitted that, initially, all the seats, including the seats under
the OBC quota, were filled up, but during the admission process
2024:KER:77103
itself, three students left the course, after joining. In the second
allotment, one seat was filled up, and to fill up the vacant seats, a
spot admission was notified, but no candidates turned up. Hence,
the said seats could not be filled up. It was further pointed out
that, the reliefs sought by the petitioner cannot be considered at
this point of time, as the classes were commenced on 19.09.2023
and now the second semester is in progress. Therefore, it was
pointed out by the learned Government that, at this point in time,
the petitioner cannot be given admission.
3. Heard Smt.C.G Bindu, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the
respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that,
since the seats remain unfilled, the petitioner must be given
admission.
5. However, after considering the facts and circumstances
of the case, I do not find any justification in entertaining the
prayer sought by the petitioner. This is particularly because, as
rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, the course
2024:KER:77103
has already commenced and the second semester is in progress,
therefore, even if the petitioner is granted admission at this stage,
it may not be possible for the petitioner to fulfil the minimum
attendance which would be a disqualification for the petitioner to
attend the examination for the first year and also for the second
year. Besides, as per the position of the petitioner in the rank list,
his rank is No.522, and it is pointed out by the learned
Government Pleader that, in the Muslim category, the admission
was granted to a person who was holding rank No.141. Therefore,
in all probabilities, there would be more meritorious candidates
than the petitioner in the list. Therefore the petitioner cannot be
granted admission, overlooking the legitimate claims of the other
rank holders. Another aspect to be noticed is that, even though
the admission was closed as early as on 30.10.2023, this writ
petition has been submitted only on 09.09.2024, after almost one
year.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance
upon the decision rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court in
the Writ Petition (Civil) No.609/2024 Atul Kumar vs. The
2024:KER:77103
Chairman (Joint Seat Allocation Authority) and Others
wherein, the honourable Supreme Court issued direction to grant
admission to a student even after commencement of the course.
However, on going through the factual circumstances in the said
case it can be seen that, the admission was denied to that
candidate in view of the certain technical glitches in the system
which prevented him from making a proper application. It is also
discernible from the said decision itself that the directions were
issued by the honourable Supreme Court in the special
circumstances of that case, and the powers under Article 142 of
the Constitution of India were expressly invoked. Therefore, the
same cannot be relied on for the purpose of granting relief to the
petitioner in this case.
In such circumstances, I do not find any justifiable reasons
to entertain the relief sought by the petitioner and accordingly it is
dismissed.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
rpk
2024:KER:77103
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32345/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING
CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGHER SECONDARY
EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P 3 TRUE COPY OF MEMO DT 24/08/2023 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P 4 TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION DT 30/11/2023
ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL OF THE GOVT TTI,
EDAPPALLY TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ABOUT THE
VACANCY IN SCIENCE STREAM.
Exhibit P 5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT 10/01/2024
SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P 6 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT 11/01/2024 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
REJECTING HIS REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BEFORE NAVA KERALA SADAS
Exhibit P 7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT 27/06/2024
SENT ON 10/07/2024 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit p 7 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DT
10/07/2024 OF EXTP7
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED.11/10/2024
SUBMITTED ON 14/10/2024 BY THE PETITIONER
UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 14/10/2024 OF
EXT. P8
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THE APEX
COURT IN ATUL KUMAR VS. THE CHAIRMAN
2024:KER:77103
(JOINT SEAT ALLOCATION AUTHORITY) IN WRIT
PETITION (CIVIL) NO.609/2024 DATED
30/09/2024.
