IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17331 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANJU.B, ASWATHI, PRAYAR NORTH, PRAYAR.P.O., OACHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, 5-TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS SANTHI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM-695001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.17331 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner claims that she belongs to Dheevara community and is entitled to be classified as belonging to SEBC and OEC. According to her, she applied for the common admission test on 9.2.2009. Thereafter, Ext.P6 was issued amending the prospectus. The income limit for availing the benefit of reservation was raised from Rs.2.5 lakhs to Rs.4.5 lakhs. According to her, while submitting the application, she did not claim the benefit of reservation because the prospectus, as it then stood, provided reservation only for persons whose parents' annual income is below Rs.2.5 lakhs. Her prayer is that she be considered against the general merit quota and also against the quota for SEBC and OEC. 2.Learned Government Pleader submits, on instructions, that though the prospectus, as it originally stood, contained the limit of Rs.2.5 lakhs as the income limit of the parents for a WPC.17331/09 Page numbers candidate to claim the benefit of reservation, a second notification issued before the petitioner submitted her application had clarified that reservation is available for persons with income limit up to Rs.4.5 lakhs and therefore, the petitioner cannot now plead that she was ignorant of that term. 3.We are dealing with the case of an adolescent stepping into the realm of higher education. It is quite well settled that prospectus forms the Magna Carta for admission. If there is conflict between different documents relating to admission, the settled principle is that the prospectus will prevail. The applicant obtained the prospectus by paying for it. The applicants treat it as the gospel for the purpose of applying for the course. Obviously therefore, even if there is any conflict, the benefit should necessarily go to the petitioner. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, it is directed that if the petitioner's claim that she is entitled to the benefit of being a member of WPC.17331/09 Page numbers Dheevara community and hence entitled to be treated as belonging to SEBC and OEC shall be considered by the competent among the respondents without reference to the fact that she had no such a claim in her application. This writ petition is allowed further directing that the petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment and necessary representation before the Controller of Entrance Examinations at the earliest. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.30/6.