Kerala High Court
Cochin University Of Science And ... vs Rishijith Krishna on 27 May, 2025
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
WA NO. 532 OF 2025 -1-
2025:KER:38282
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WA NO. 532 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2025 IN W.P.(C)
NO.41420 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4:
1 COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY(CUSAT)
REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN, PIN - 682022
2 THE REGISTRAR
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY(CUSAT), COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,
COCHIN, PIN - 682022
3 DIRECTOR(DOA),
DIRECTORATE OF ADMISSION, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY(CUSAT), COCHIN
UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN,, PIN - 682022
4 HON.DIRECTOR
PROF.N.R.MADHAVA MENON INTER DISCIPLINARY
CENTRE FOR RESEARCH ETHICS AND PROTOCOLS,
CUSAT, PIN - 682022
BY ADV.
SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY
WA NO. 532 OF 2025 -2-
2025:KER:38282
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT:
1 RISHIJITH KRISHNA,
S/O ADV.AJITH MURALI, RISHIKESHAM,
HOUSE NO.248, GCRA-B BLOCK,
CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR P.O., PATHADIPALAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682033
2 NAJIH PULLANI,
S/O ABDUL GAFFOOR PULLANI, PULLANI HOUSE,
OTHUKKUNGAL P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676525
BY ADV.:
SRI.JAJU BABU (SR)
SRI.MANIKANDAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 532 OF 2025 -3-
2025:KER:38282
JUDGMENT
AMIT RAWAL , J.
Present writ appeal is directed against the
judgment of the Single Bench dated 10.01.2025, allowing
the writ petition No.41420 of 2024, wherein the
respondent-petitioner had knocked the door of this Court
claiming the following reliefs:
"i. To set aside Exhibit-P10 letter issued by the
2nd respondent University;
ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing
the respondents to fill the existing vacancies of
B.Sc Computer Science LLB Course by
admitting to the petitioner;
iii. to declare that the petitioner is an eligible
candidate to get admission in B.Sc Computer
science LLB Course in the year 2024-2025;
iv. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing
the respondents to give admission in B.Sc
Computer Science LLB Course in the year 2024-
2025;
v. issue such other appropriate writ, order or
direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and
proper, in the circumstances of the case and,
2025:KER:38282
vi. To dispense with the translation of the
documents produced in the Vernacular
Language."
2. Succinctly the facts in brief for the
adjudication of the controversy is that, for the academic
session 2024-25, first respondent - writ petitioner had
sought admission for B.Sc. Computer Science Five Year
LLB course. In the Common Admission Test conducted
by the Cochin University of Science and Technology, the
first respondent was placed in the rank list at Serial
No.542. Certain seats under the NRI Quota were also
available. The University started conducting the spot
admissions and till the seventh spot admission, the stage
of the first respondent - writ petitioner did not come
owing to low rank. The seventh round of spot admission
was conducted on 10.09.2024, whereas the classes for
B.Sc. Computer Science LLB Course, for the said
academic year, commenced on 02.09.2024. Despite the
fact that certain vacancies were still available, the
Universities conducted the eighth round of spot
2025:KER:38282
admission on 15.10.2024 and admitted certain students.
Certain students, who had applied under general
category had simultaneously applied under NRI category
also. But, since they could not make it under general
category, knocked the door of this Court for considering
their name under NRI quota, which matter was disposed
off and they had been admitted under the NRI Quota.
Two(2) vacancies under the general category is still
vacant, and since, the persons higher in rank than the
first respondent - petitioner had not approached the
court, the first respondent-writ petitioner took the
chance by filing the writ petition claiming the relief
aforementioned.
3. Learned Single Bench on consideration
of the matter, vide interim order dated 25.11.2024,
granted the provisional admission. It is a matter of
record that the first respondent - writ petitioner has
already undertaken two courses and ultimately vide
judgment under challenge dated 10.01.2025, the writ
petition has been allowed. The stand of the University
2025:KER:38282
throughout had been with regard to the notification
dated 17.02.1992, Ext.R2(a), which do not permit
admission to a course beyond fifteen(15) working days
after the commencement of a semester with a relaxation
of thirty(30) days for the candidates belonging to SC/ST
candidates.
4. Mr.S.P.Aravindakshan Pillay, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant -
respondent University submitted that candidates higher
in rank were available and in case the first respondent -
writ petitioner is granted admission, it will open a
Pandora of boxes and the University will not be able to
accommodate them in the absence of availability of
seats.
5. On the other hand, Mr.Jaju Babu, learned
Senior counsel submitted that first respondent -
petitioner had already completed two(2) semesters. Even
otherwise, Ext.R2(a) will not be applicable as the eighth
round of spot admission was done after thirty(30) days of
commencement of the course and therefore the
2025:KER:38282
University had not been diligently following the
notification dated 17.02.1992.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties and appraised the paper book.
7. No doubt the first respondent - writ
petitioner had obtained rank at serial No.542 and many
persons senior to him were also eligible. There had been
a litigation with regard to the candidates who had
submitted application under general category as well as
the NRI and through the intervention of this Court, were
able to get the NRI admission. It is a matter of record
that two(2) vacancies under the general category had
fallen vacant on 10.09.2024, within eight(8) days of the
commencement of the course. But the spot admission
was completed only on 15.10.2024 and still there is one
seat available. It is in these circumstances, first
respondent - petitioner had knocked on the door of the
court with the relief aforementioned.
8. We are of the view that the persons higher in
rank than the first respondent - petitioner had not
2025:KER:38282
approached this court but only the first respondent -
petitioner with the rank of 542 and vide interim order,
had been granted permission to complete the course.
Therefore, the judgment under challenge does not suffer
from any illegality or perversity or there is not any
manifest error to warrant interference. But, it is made
clear that this is not to be considered as a precedent for
future admissions.
Writ appeal stands allowed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
MURALEE KRISHNA S.
JUDGE
vv
