IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1805 of 2009(M) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. CHRISTOPHER MOHAN RAJ M.AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.MOHANDAS, CHRISTOPHER BHAVAN, PARAN MOOLA, MACHIYODU, CHENGAL P.O., NEYYATTINKARA. 2. SHAFEEQUE K.P.AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. PAREED K.M., KAMBAKUDY HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM NELLIKKUZHY P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OFNURSING EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PRINCIPAL , T.D.MEDICAL COLLEGE AND NURSING COLLEGE, ALAPPUZHA. 4. PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALAPPUZHA 5. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE BOARD FOR ADJUDICATION OF STUDENT GRIEVANCES UNIVERSIY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.P.N. SANTHOSH R5 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 1805 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners are the 2nd year B.Sc Nursing Students ( 2nd Batch) of Government College of Nursing, Alappuzha. By Exhibit P1 proceedings of the 4th respondent, on the allegation that the petitioners have ragged the Junior students, they were placed under suspension. Exhibit P2 is the F.I.R. in Crime No.389/2008 of Punnapra Police Station, in which the petitioners have been charged for offences under the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998. The 4th respondent in the meanwhile, by Exhibit P3 extended Exhibit P1 suspension of the petitioners until police case finalised and until further a decision is taken in the matter. 2. In W.P(C) No.35581 of 2008, the petitioners challenged the suspension order before this Court and the case was disposed of vide Exhibit P4 Judgment directing them to seek redressal of their grievance before the appellate authority, namely, the 6th respondent herein. 3. Though the petitioners submit that they filed Exhibit P5 appeal before the 5th respondent, the 5th respondent submits that they have not received any appeal and that in such matters, the 6th respondent is the W.P.(C) No. 1805/ 2009 2 competent authority. In the meanwhile, the first respondent also issued Exhibit P6, addressed to the second respondent requesting to take necessary action to comply with the direction in Exhibit P4 judgment. 4. As at present, the petitioners remain under suspension and examination is forth coming, and therefore the writ petition is filed praying that respondents 2 and 4 be directed to take decision on their request for revocation of suspension and further direct the 5th respondent to issue hall ticket to the petitioners and to permit them to attend the examination. 5. Learned government pleader on instruction submits that the Principal of the College has already considered their request and has declined to revoke the suspension. Thus from the facts, it is evident that the petitioners remain under suspension and if that be so, they have no right to be issued hall ticket to appear for the examination. If that be so, this court will not be justified in directing the authorities to issue hall ticket at this stage. Writ petition fails and hence it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm