IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 33164 of 2007(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ RAMESH SANKAR P.K., AGED 24, S/O.BALAKRISHANAN, PULIYAKODE KUNNU HOUSE, MERIKUNNU P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 012. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.K.B.SUJAI KUMAR SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. SARITHA B., D/O.BALACHANDRAN, UTHASSERIL PADINJATTATHIL, ENATHU P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA 691 526. 3. PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).33164/2007 -------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2007 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an aspirant for admission to the Five Year LLB course, 2007. This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by certain irregularities committed by the the first respondent in the matter of allotment of seats and the admission given to the second respondent. 2. Petitioner now points out that being an SC candidate, he is entitled to reservation in the matter of admission and that one Rekhamol, an SC candidate, who has been admitted in the Calicut Law College, has already applied for transfer, in the SC vacancy of Ajitha C.N in the Eranakulam Law College. It is stated by the petitioner that the request of Rekhamol in this regard is pending consideration of the first respondent and this submission of the petitioner is not contradicted by the learned Government Pleader also. 2. If as a matter of fact there is an SC vacancy in Eranakulam and that Rekhamol has already made an W.P.(C).33164/2007 2 application for transfer from Calicut to the college in Cochin, I see no reason why the first respondent should not consider that request. Once that request of Rekhamol is allowed, obviously their will be a vacancy in Calicut Law College where the petitioner will also be accommodated. If it is so done, there is no necessity to disturb the admission granted to the second respondent who, it is alleged, has been irregularly admitted. 3. In view of the submissions made, I direct the first respondent to grant the request for transfer made by Rekhamol and to issue memo granting admission to the petitioner in the vacancy so created in the Calicut Law College as expeditiously as possible at any rate within ten days on production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC Judge mrcs