IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29571 of 2010(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- THARISH T., S/O.THAMRAKSHAN,18 YEARS, LOTUS, MAMPALLIKUNNU,CHATHANNOOR PO, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.A. SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, O/O.THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. PANKAJA KASTHURI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING KANDALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 512. REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL. 3. AMMINI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KANNAMPERIYARAM, MANKARA PO, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH R2 BY ADVS. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29571 of 2010 V ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Scheduled Caste candidate. In the year 2009, petitioner got selected and was alloted by the first respondent to the second respondent College. Petitioner joined the College and commenced his studies. In 2010, petitioner again appeared in the common entrance examination and got himself selected and allotted to third respondent college. Thereupon, he requested the second respondent for issuance of TC. Relying on the provisions of Ext.P5 prospectus for the year 2009, petitioner was asked to deposit remaining years' fee towards liquidated damages payable under clause 12.2.4(a) of the prospectus. It was therefore this writ petition was filed, contending that SC candidates are exempted from the aforesaid provision of the prospectus and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be called upon to pay the liquidated damages. WPC.29571/10 : 2 : 2. However, along with the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, they have produced Ext.R2(a), Government Order dated 06-07-2009 which reads as follows: “ Candidates who join any of the 9 Private Self-Financing Engineering Colleges based on the second allotment may cancel their admission on or before 14-8-2009, in which case the amount remitted by them would be refunded and all documents relating to their admission returned without any penal consequences. However, those candidates who wish to cancel their admission after 14-8- 2009 shall have to remit the entire course fee in the College concerned to receive back the documents submitted in the College.” 3. Petitioner seeks to reiterate his plea, relying clause 5 of Ext.R2(a), which provides that the entire tuition fee for candidates belonging to SC and allotted by the first respondent to the Government quota seats will be paid by the government at the rates mentioned in the order. Counsel contends that since liability to pay fee is that of the WPC.29571/10 : 3 : Government, the liability to pay liquidated damages, if at all, should also be that of the Government. 4. I am not in a position to accept this contention. First of all, clause 5 of Ext.R2(a) relied on by the petitioner only creates liability on the Government to pay fee in respect of a student and what is now demanded by the second respondent is liquidated damages. That apart, clause 5 cannot apply in a situation like this, for the reason that if the plea of the petitioner is accepted, it will be open to the candidates to change the college as and when he please and make the Government liable for both the liquidated damages and fee, on each occasion the College is changed. That cannot be the purport clause. Therefore, for both these reasons, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks