IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15707 of 2010(K)
1. JUSTINE ABRAHAM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR,
3. THE PRINCIPAL,
For Petitioner :SMT.V.VIJITHA
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :10/06/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). NO.15707 OF 2010
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner underwent Higher Secondary course in the year 2005
– 2006 and then, appeared for the regular examination in the year 2006.
However, he could clear only two papers out of the six papers. Thereafter,
the petitioner went abroad for taking up employment. On his return, he
registered his name for appearing in the Higher Secondary examination
which was scheduled to be conducted in March, 2010. He took the said
examination with Registration No.2900385. Though he had appeared for
four papers, he could clear only three of them. He had failed in English.
The contention of the petitioner is that thereafter, he was anxiously
awaiting the notification for the Save A Year Examination. Ext.P2 dated
12.5.2010 is the notification issued by the Government for that purpose.
Pursuant to the same, the petitioner approached the third respondent for
getting the application form to register for the SAY and improvement
examination, June 2010 with a view to clear English paper, the only paper
left for clearance. However, he was informed that he would be ineligible
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010 2
for appearing in the SAY Examination. It is in the said circumstances that
this Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner.
2. When this matter came up for admission on 21.5.2010, this
Court passed an interim order directing the respondents to accept the
application submitted by the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P2. However, it
was specifically made clear thereunder that the acceptance of application
would not inure any right to the petitioner for appearing in the SAY
examination scheduled to be held on 14.6.2010.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent in
this Writ Petition. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to appear in
the SAY examination to be held on 14.6.2010. It is contended that being
a registrant for the Higher Secondary Examination, March 2010, he is
entitled to appear for the SAY and improvement examination to clear
English paper. The further contention of the petitioner is that there is
nothing in Ext.P2 which would disentitle the petitioner from appearing in
the SAY examination. The respondents refuted the claim of the petitioner
contending that a perusal of Ext.P2 itself would reveal that there is nothing
which would make the petitioner eligible to appear for the SAY
examination. The learned Government Pleader brought to my attention the
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010 3
conspicuous absence of the category to which the petitioner belongs as a
group eligible to appear for the SAY examination. In support of the said
contention, the respondents have produced Ext.R2(a) order along with the
counter affidavit. It would reveal that persons who had undergone the
Higher Secondary course prior to 2006-07 fall under SCHEME-3 category.
Admittedly, the petitioner underwent the Higher Secondary Course in the
academic year 2005-06 and therefore, undoubtedly belong to SCHEME-3
category. In respect of the SCHEME-3 category, Ext.R2(a) order Ex:II(1)
53388/HSE/2009 dated 27.10.2009 was issued earlier. The said document
was made available by the learned Government Pleader during the course
of argument. It is stated as follows in the said notification: “This shall be
the last examination under this scheme.” If a candidate under
SCHEME-3 appearing for the said last examination failed to become
eligible for higher studies he/she should again join the higher secondary
course for pursuing his /her studies under the new scheme. Candidates
belonging to the said category was also informed that in case of their
failure to clear all the papers and became eligible for higher studies they
would have to join higher secondary course under the new grading system.
Admittedly, the petitioner belongs to SCHEME-3 category. When once
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010 4
category to which the petitioner belongs is identified his eligibility to
appear for the SAY examination depends upon the eligibility clause in
Ext.P2 notification dated 12.5.2010. A scrutiny of Ext.P2 would reveal
that the category to which the petitioner belongs viz., SCHEME-3 is not
one among the categories eligible to appear for the SAY examination to
be conducted in June 2010. In other words, it would reveal that the
category to which the petitioner belongs has not been enlisted under
Ext.P2 as an eligible category. If that be so, merely because the petitioner
has registered for the Higher Secondary Examination, March, 2010 cannot
and will not fetch any eligibility to him to appear for the SAY examination
to be held in June 2010 as the eligibility to appear for the said examination
is governed by clause relating eligibility given in Ext.P2. Granting
permission to the petitioner alone in such circumstances would amount to
injustice to the other students who belong to the same category since
SCHEME-3 category are not at all eligible under Ext.P2 to appear for the
SAY examination to be held on 14.6.2010. Therefore, there is no merit in
the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to appear for the SAY
examination. The petitioner could not bring to my attention any provision
in Ext.P2 notification that confers a legal right on the petitioner to appear
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010 5
for the SAY examination to be held in June 2010. Therefore, there is no
merit in the contentions of the petitioner and the Writ Petition is,
accordingly, dismissed.
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
spc
W.P.(C) NO.15707/2010 6
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
W.P.(C). NO. /2010
JUDGMENT
June, 2010