IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 16-07-2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.11477 of 2009 P.R.Rakesh (CT amended as per order, dated 13.7.2009, by MJJ in M.P.No.1/09 in W.P.No.11477 of 2009) .. Petitioner. Versus 1.Directorate of Technical Education, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 2.P.M.R.Institute of Technology, Adayalampattu, Chennai, Represented by its Principal. 3. AICTE-South Regional Office, Shastri Bhawan, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006 rep. by Regional Director. .. Respondents. (3rd respondent impleaded as per the order of this Court, dated 16.7.2009, by MJJ in M.P.No.2 of 2009 in W.P.No.11477 of 2009) Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to issue the transfer certificate before 30.6.2009. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar For Respondents : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy Government Advocate (R1) Mr.M.Purusothaman (R2) O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner before 30.6.2009 and for other orders.
3. The father of the petitioner has filed the affidavit in support of the writ petition, on behalf of his minor son P.R.Rakesh, who had completed his first year of the Bachelor of Engineering Course in I.T. Branch, in the second respondent Institute. It has been stated that the petitioner had joined the second respondent Institute in the month of August, 2008. However, the petitioner is inclined to discontinue the course in the second respondent Institute in order to continue his studies in some other Institute or College. Therefore, the petitioner had submitted a representation to the second respondent to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner, to enable him to continue his course elsewhere.
4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent, it has been stated that the petitioner had completed his first year of studies in the second respondent Institute and there is no hindrance in his pursuing the second year studies in the B.E. course. It has been stated that the allegations made by the petitioner against the second respondent College are baseless and false. The reasons stated by the petitioner for leaving the Institute are incorrect.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent had placed before this Court the Public Notice issued by the All India Council for Technical Education, wherein it has been stated as follows:
“In the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the courses, the wait listed candidates should be given admission against the vacant seat. The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only), shall be refunded and returned by the institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme. It would not be permissible for institutions and Universities to retain the School/Institution Leaving Certificate in original. Should a student leave after joining the course and if the seat consequently failing vacant has been filled by another candidates by the last date of admission, the institution must return the fee collected with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where applicable.”
The learned counsel had further stated that the second respondent cannot retain the Transfer Certificate and other original records submitted by the petitioner, in case he decides to leave the second respondent Institute, discontinuing his studies.
6. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that this Court may be pleased to direct the second respondent to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner and to return the original certificates and other documents submitted by the petitioner to the second respondent Institute, at the time of his admission.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner had stated that the petitioner has not made any allegations against the second respondent Institute. He has only quoted the news paper reports relating to the second respondent Institute. However, the petitioner undertakes to withdraw such statements made against the second respondent Institute and that he also undertakes not to pursue the matter, any further.
8. On such submissions being made, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent Institute had submitted that the second respondent Institute is prepared to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner and that it would also return the original certificates and other documents, if any, submitted by the petitioner, at the time of his admission.
9. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, the second respondent is directed to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner and to return the other documents, if any, submitted by him at the time of his admission to the B.E. Course, in the second respondent Institute, within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.
Index:Yes/No 16-07-2009
Internet:Yes/No
csh
Note to Office:
Issue copy by 17-07-2009
M.JAICHANDREN,J.
csh
To
1.Directorate of Technical Education,
Guindy, Chennai-600 032.
2.P.M.R.Institute of Technology,
Adayalampattu, Chennai,
Represented by its Principal.
3. AICTE-South Regional Office,
Shastri Bhawan, 26, Haddows Road,
Chennai-600 006 rep. by Regional
Director.
Writ Petition No.11477 of 2009
16-07-2009