IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21637 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAZEEM MOHIYUDDEEN PADIYATH, PADIYATH HOUSE, C/O. P.A.MOHIYUDDEEN, PANAYIKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.A.ABUL HASSAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., KOCHI-682 022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., KOCHI-682 022. 3. DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS & ACADEMIC ADMISSIONS, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., KOCHI-682 022. ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC,COCHI U FOR R1,2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.21637 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Keralite and an Indian citizen. He applied for admission to the B.Tech course in the first respondent University in the seat reserved for 'Non-Resident Indians'. As per the applications etc, he put forward his candidature correctly. But during registering his options on line, he made a mistake and he ticked the coloumn signifying him as a 'Non-Keralite'. As a result, the University refused to consider him for admission in the quota set apart for 'Non-Resident Indians'. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has approached this court seeking the following reliefs: “i) to call for the records in this case; ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order, directing the respondents to admit the petitioner for B.Tech(Electronics and Communication Engineering) in NRI quota in Cochin University of Science and Technology; iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass order on Ext.P6 representation submitted by the petitioner and till then to reserve a seat to the petitioner for B.Tech(Electronics and Communication Engineering) in NRI quota”. W.P.(c)No.21637/10 2 2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the University also. The learned Standing Counsel on instructions submits that once the petitioner signified his option as 'non- Keralite', he can be considered for admission only in that category. For admission in that category, the minimum marks for Mathematics is prescribed as 50% and the petitioner has secured only 47%. Therefore, according to the learned Standing Counsel for the University, the petitioner's candidature cannot be considered in the quota reserved for “Non-Resident Indians”. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. Ext.P1 is the passport of the petitioner. Ext.P4 is his application. Ext.P5 is the confirmation of registration. All of them conclusively prove that the petitioner is a “Keralite”. Of course, he admits that while registering his option on line, he made a mistake and ticked the wrong coloumn relating to 'Non-Keralite”. I am of opinion that, that mistake is not capital enough to deny admission to a student. It is not as if the University does not make any mistakes in the course of business. In fact, they do commit a lot of mistakes. To error is human. To allow that to affect the future of a student is W.P.(c)No.21637/10 3 certainly not human. Of course, I could have understood if the University had stated that, in the application, he had given his status wrongly, but he had only committed a mistake while registering the option on line. I am of opinion that in so far as the petitioner's eligibility for admission in the NRI quota is undisputed and he is being denied admission only on account of the mistake committed by him, the petitioner should not be allowed to suffer on that reason. In the above circumstances, I direct the University to consider the petitioner's candidature in the quota prescribed for “Non-Resident Indians” without reference to the mistake committed by the petitioner while registering the option on line in the ongoing admission process. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.21637/10 4 W.P.(c)No.21637/10 5