IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2007 / 19TH BHADRA 1929 WA.No. 2215 of 2007 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.25001/2007DATED 17.8.2007 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- SHALIMA S., D/O.SHOUKATHALY, KAIRALI HOUSE, KAROOR, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.KRISHNA PILLAI RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES, OLD HIGH COURT BUILDING, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. KERALA PRIVATE MEDICAL COLLEGE MANAGEMENTS ASSOCIATION (K.P.M.C.M.A.) T.C.13/1187E, VARAMBATH BUILDING, KANNAMMOOLA, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MEERA SRI.N.JOHN SAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/09/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.2215 of 2007 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 10th day of September, 2007 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. Petitioner is a student. In the rank list prepared, she is assigned rank at Sl.No.897. According to her, her ranking should have been around Sl.No.300. 2. Making that as a grievance she has already filed an appropriate representation before the Admission Supervisory Committee for Professional Colleges for appropriate relief. Even before that representation could be considered by the said Committee, petitioner has rushed to this Court. 3. The learned Single Judge being of the opinion that since the representation of the petitioner is already pending before the Committee, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The reasoning and conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, is neither arbitrary nor illegal nor erroneous. Therefore, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN) JUDGE vns