IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 5488 of 2011(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SINIMOL M.K.,AGED 41 YEARS,D/O.P.KRISHNAN LAST GRADE SERVANT GR.II,(REMOVED FROM SERVICE), MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVESITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O. KOTTAYAM -686560 RESIDING AT MUNDACKAL HOUSE, MANNAR, POOZHIKOL P.O. KADUTHURUTHI, KOTTAYAM - 686604. BY ADV. SRI.P.T.DINESH SRI.JOSE JOSEPH (MANNAR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O.KOTTAYAM - 686560. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560. 3. THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560. 4. THE ENQUIRY OFFICER AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR III, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560. BY ADV. SRI.T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.5488/11 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF RELEVANT PART OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.ADA.3/1/3753/96 DT.25.9.96 BY THE M.G. UNIVERSITY. EXT.P2: COPY OF RELEVANT PART OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.ADA.3/1-07/2005. EXT.P3: COPY OF RELEVANT PART OF THE SSLC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER WITH REGISTER NO.39467 IN THE YEAR OF MARCH 1989. EXT.P4: COPY OF RELEVANT PART OF 10TH STANDARD EQUIVALENCY “A” LEVEL EXAMINATION (LIBERALISED SCHEME) CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.ADA 4/C-4/09 DT.6.11.09 BY THE REGISTRAR. EXT.P6: COPY OF MEMO NO.ADA.3/1-3/2010 DT.8.4.10 BY THE REGISTRAR. EXT.P7: COPY OF ORDER NO.3062/AIII/3/2010/ADMN. DT.22.6.10 BY THE REGISTRAR. EXT.P8: COPY OF APPEAL DT.2.7.10 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF SHOW CAUSE MEMO NO.ADA.3/3/1553 A/2010 DT.30.6.10 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEFENCE DT.13.7.10 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P11: COPY OF MEMO NO.AD.A3/3/1553A/2010/ENQUIRY DT.2.8.10 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: COPY OF REPLY DT.12.8.10 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P13: COPY OF ENQUIRY REPORT BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER DT.22.10.10. EXT.P14: COPY OF NOTICE NO.ADA3/3/1553 A/2010 DT.15.11.10 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P15: COPY OF OBJECTION DT.17.12.10 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P16: COPY OF ORDER NO.466/A3/3/2011/AD DT.29.1.11 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P17: COPY OF NOTICE NO.ADA/3/1553A/2010 DT.26.8.11 BY THE REGISTRAR. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE dsn T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.5488 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the proceedings leading to her termination from service produced as Exhibit P16. 2. The petitioner was appointed by the University in the post of Last Grade Servant Grade-II. The notification for the same was published by the University on 25.9.1996 and last date fixed for receipt of application was on 31.10.1996. There was a re-notification as per Exhibit P2 wherein the last date was shown as 21.11.2005. As on the date of submission of application, the petitioner's qualification was SSLC(failed). Thereafter, it appears that she appeared for the 10th Standard Equivalency “A” level examination conducted in the year 2008, specifically, in August, 2008, and she passed the said examination. 3. During the selection process, it appears that the petitioner had to file an affidavit showing various details. Later, disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner, allegedly on the basis of some complaint that the petitioner suppressed the W.P.(C)No.5488/11 -2- factum regarding the acquisition of SSLC qualification and finally proceedings have been issued against her terminating her appointment. 4. Various contentions have been raised in the Writ Petition. I am not going into the details of the same, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has got an effective remedy of filing an appeal under Statute 61(2) of Chapter 4 of the M.G.University Statutes, 1997. 5. The legal questions raised by the petitioner in a nut shell are to the effect that the issue herein is different from a case where, as on the last date of submission of application, a person having higher qualification, has suppressed it before the authorities concerned. Herein, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the notification initially was published in 1996 and she had failed in SSLC Examination and the selection process was also dragged on. In the meanwhile, the petitioner obtained a pass in the SSLC examination and therefore it is submitted that the present case is different. 6. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that the University had taken a decision not to invite applications from W.P.(C)No.5488/11 -3- persons having SSLC and above for the post of Last Grade Servants. 7. I am not going into the contentions raised herein, since the petitioner has got a remedy of filing an appeal and if an appeal is filed within one month from today along with a copy of this judgment, the same will be entertained by the Chancellor of the University, as the Writ Petition was pending from 21.2.2011 till this date. Appropriate orders will be passed in the appeal on its merits, after hearing the parties, as expeditiously as possible. 8. All the legal contentions are left open. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE dsn