IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15707 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JUSTINE ABRAHAM, S/O. DANIEL ABRAHAM, EDATHIL PUTHENPARAMBIL, CHANGANKERY, EDATHVA.P.O, ALAPPUZHA - 689 573. BY ADV. SMT.V.VIJITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, ST. ALOYSIUS HSS, EDATHUA, ALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANDESH RAJA-R1, R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.15707/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: Admission ticket of the petitioner for H.S Examination for the year 2010. P2: Notification No.EX-II(1)/53388/HSE/2009 dated 12.5.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: R2(a):True copy of the relevant pages of the order No.EX:II(1) 53388.HSE.09 dated 27.10.2009. 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