IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 36214 of 2010(B)
1. LIBIN.A.P., S/O.PAPPACHAN A.T.,
... Petitioner
2. SHINTO KURIAN, S/O.KURIAN JOSEPH,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF AYURVEDA MEDICAL
3. NAGARJUNA AYURVEDA INSTITUTE
For Petitioner :SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :08/12/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 36214 OF 2010
=====================
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Pursuant to Ext.P3 prospectus, petitioners applied and got
selected and joined the course of Ayurveda Therapist in the 3rd
respondent College. By Ext.P4, Government rejected approval of
their admission on the ground that the petitioners did not satisfy
the eligibility criterion laid down in the prospectus. According to
the petitioners, they having secured more than 50% marks
specified in the prospectus, the stand taken in Ext.P4 is erroneous
and therefore the writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P4 and
seeking consequential reliefs.
2. On instructions, learned Government Pleader points
out that as per Clause 1 of Ext.P3 Prospectus, candidates
belonging to State of Kerala and who have passed SSLC or an
equivalent examination with 50% marks (C+ Grade) having
eligibility to undergo +2 or equivalent courses are eligible for
admission. It is stated that petitioners did not satisfy neither the
percentage requirement nor the C+ grade specified in Ext.P3. It
is further submitted that way back on 7/6/2010, the 2nd
WPC No. 36214/10
:2 :
respondent had issued communications requiring the colleges to
remove ineligible students, who were enrolled and it was despite
the above that the petitioners continued the course.
3. If as stated by the learned Government Pleader,
petitioners do not satisfy the 50% and C+ Grade laid down in
Ext.P3, the petitioners cannot find fault with Ext.P4 for the reason
that they are ineligible. In view of the submission thus made by
the learned Government Pleader and as there is nothing to
contradict the said submission, I do not find any substance in the
challenge against Ext.P4.
Writ petition is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp