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. 2417 of 2009(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- AUGUSTIN.K.J,AGED 55 YRS, S/O.LATE JOSEPH,KARIPPAT HOUSE,L.F.C.ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. THE VICE CANCELLOR,S.R.M.UNIVERSITY, KATTANKULANTHUR,KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REGISTRAR, S.R.M.UNIVERSITY, KATTANKULATHUR-603 203, KANCHEEPURAM DIST. 3. THE DIRECTOR (ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY S.R.M.UNIVERSITY,KATTANKULATHUR-603203, KANCHEEPURAM. 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. 2417 OF 2009 (K) ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P1 and P5. These are two communications that the petitioner has received in Kochi informing that his ward Sri.Arun Austin K, a student of SRM University, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Kancheepuram District, Tamilnadu did not possess the minimum required attendance during the 5th and 7th semester and therefore, he has been detained for lack of attendance without permitting him to appear for University examinations. Admittedly, these are communications issued by the Director (Engineering and Technology) and by the Registrar of the said University. 2. In my view, apart from the receipt of these communications at Cochin, which cannot be said to be an integral part of the cause of action for the petitioner or his son, the cause of action in so far as this writ petition is concerned arose totally within the jurisdiction of the High court within whose jurisdiction the University is situated. 3. Therefore, in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan and others v. M/s Swaika Properties and WPC 2417/08 :2 : another (AIR 1985 SC 1289), I am not persuaded to hold that this Court has territorial jurisdiction to consider the matter. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp