IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2010 / 22ND ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30802 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- APARNA SREEKUMAR, D/O.K.SREEKUAMR, AGED 19 SREE GANGA, EIKARA, KARAKUALM P.O.,TRIVANDRUM BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA SRI.S.NIDHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, SHANTHI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM 3. THE KERALA PRIVATE MEDICAL COLLEGE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, REP.BY THE SECRETARY L.M.S. COMPOUND, TRIVANDRUM 4. THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE (JUSTICE MUHAMMED COMMITTE) REP.BY THE SECRETARY, ROOM NO.8,RAM MOHAN PALACE, (OLD HIGH COURT BUILDING)COCHIN 5. THE TRAVANCORE MEDICAL COLLEGE, REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL, KOTTIYAM KOLLAM ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW FOR R3 SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R3 SRI.ARUN THOMAS FOR R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. DILEEP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. True copy of the mark/data sheet of Medical Entrance Examination issued to the petitioner. Ext.P2. True copy of the receipt for fee dated 9.9.2010. Ex.P3. True copy of the bond executed by the petitioner in favour of 5th respondent. Ext.P4. True copy of the petition submitted by the petitioner before the 4th respondent. // true copy // P.S to Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.30802 OF 2010(A) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, he got allotment to the 5th respondent college and remitted fee of Rs.5.5 lakhs and interest free deposit of Rs.5 lakhs, on 9.9.2010. It is stated that since some other similarly situated students had obtained interim orders from this court dispensing with the requirement of bank guarantee on 29.9.2010 and awaiting of the benefit of the order, petitioner furnished Ext.P3 bond to the 5th respondent. According to the petitioner, though she offered to furnish bank guarantee, without accepting the bank guarantee, the 5th respondent refused admission to the petitioner. It is complaining of the above the writ petition is filed. 2. Counsel appearing for the 5th respondent submits that though the petitioner remitted the fee as stated, petitioner did not furnish bank guarantee on or before 30.9.2010 as required in the prospectus. It is stated that therefore the petitioner was denied admission. WPC.No.30802 /2010 :2 : 3. It is also contended that, the benefit of order of this court dispensing with the requirement of bank guarantee, though reversed subsequently by the Division Bench, was available only to the petitioners in those case and not to the petitioner herein. Therefore, it is argued that the bond offered by the petitioner was not accepted by the College. 4. Admittedly the petitioner did not obtain any order from this court relieving her of the obligation of furnishing of bank guarantee. She also has no case of having furnished bank guarantee before 30.9.2010, a requirement in terms of the prospectus. In such a situation, this court cannot find fault with the 5th respondent for not having granted admission to the petitioner. Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No.30802 /2010 :3 :