IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1413 of 2010(B)
1. KUTTIALIPRATH KHYRUNNISA RAZAAK
... Petitioner
Vs
1. COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
3. SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE
For Petitioner :SRI.K.N.VIKRAMATHITHYAN PILLAI
For Respondent :SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :15/07/2010
O R D E R
S. Siri Jagan, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P(C) No. 1413 of 2010
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 15th day of July, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an Indian resident. She married a Sri-Lankan
citizen. Petitioner’s second daughter applied for admission to
professional degree courses in Kerala. She has been applying for the
admission to the Medical Colleges in Kerala for some years. Every
year, her application was being rejected on the ground that she has
not produced the OCI registration card, which is a must, since she is a
foreign citizen. At the same time, the application submitted by the
petitioner and her daughter for OCI registration is not being
considered by the 3rd respondent . It is under the above
circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the
following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
order or direction to the 1st respondent or to his officers
subordinate not to reject Ext. P17 application for admission to
professional degree courses 2010, Kerala, submitted by Fathima
Sifana alias Sifana Razack, the daughter of the petitioner, on the
ground of non-production of OCI Card along with Ext. P17
application.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
order or direction to the 1st respondent or to his officers
subordinate, considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
to grant the petitioner’s daughter Miss Fathima Sifana alias Sifana
Razack, sufficient opportunity to submit the OCI card in
compliance of the requirements under Ext. P15 notification, to
appear for the Engineering-Medical Entrance Examination for the
year 2010.”
2. On 2-6-2010, I passed the following interim order:
“The petitioner seeks declaration of the results for the
Entrance Examination written by her daughter and to allow her to
participate in the admission process in accordance with the rank
of the petitioner’s daughter in the Entrance Examination.
2. The learned Government Pleader strenuously
W.P.C. No. 1413/2010. -: 2 :-
opposes with the help of a counter affidavit. According to him,
without an OCI permit, the petitioner’s daughter is not entitled to
have her application for admission, even considered. He would
strongly argue that respondents 1 and 2 are not in any way at
fault in the matter. The prospectus is very clear, which insists on
production of an OCI permit for consideration of the application of
persons like the petitioner. It is very true that production of an
OCI permit is a condition precedent for consideration of the
application. But, here the petitioner’s daughter could not produce
it not because of any fault on her part. She has applied for an OCI
permit last year. It was not either granted or rejected. She could
not get admission last year. Again the candidate applied for OCI
permit. There is no response from the Central Government and
the petitioner approached this Court as early as on 14.1.2010 with
this writ petition. Despite receipt of notice Central Government is
not even favouring this court with a counter affidavit or statement
as to why the application filed by the petitioner’s daughter for
OCI permit is not disposed of. I am of opinion that a person who
is not at fault, should not be allowed to suffer time and again
because of the lethargy on the part of the third respondent.
Therefore, I am satisfied that the petitioner’s daughter should be
allowed to participate in the admission process notwithstanding
the production of the OCI permit, provisionally subject to result of
the writ petition.
Accordingly, there would be a direction to the first
respondent to declare the results of the petitioner’s daughter for
the Entrance Examination and to allow her to participate in the
selection process like counselling etc., if as per the rank obtained
by her in the Entrance Examination she is entitled to. However, I
make it clear that this would be subject to the result of the writ
petition and if ultimately her application for OCI is rejected by the
Central Government on valid grounds, her admission would be
liable to be cancelled. The third respondent shall immediately
consider the application of the petitioner’s daughter for OCI
permit and pass an order within one week from today. The
learned Asst. solicitor General shall fax a copy of this order to the
third respondent who shall act on the same positively within the
time prescribed above, failing which this court would be
compelled to order personal appearance of the third respondent.”
Pursuant thereto, on 5-7-2010, the learned Assistant Solicitor General
has submitted before me that OCI registration has been granted on
30-6-2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner today submits that the
W.P.C. No. 1413/2010. -: 3 :-
registration has been forwarded to the 1st respondent. In the above
circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st
respondent to regularise the admission of the petitioner in accordance
with he OCI registration now forwarded as if it has been produced in
time as required under the prospectus.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.
Tds/