IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN SATURDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2011 / 29TH SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1246 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19561/2011 Dated 11/08/2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- ABRAHAM ZACHARIAH S/O.M.C.ZACHARIAH, MANIMALA HOUSE CHINGAVANA PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRIC PIN 686 531. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.SEBASTIAN JOSEPH (KURISUMMOOTTIL) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 010. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR NCC KERALA P.B.NO.2212, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 010. 3. THE COMMANDER, GP H2 NCC, KOTTAYAM 696 001. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA FOR R2-3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. NO. 1246 OF 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to grant relief to the appellant which is by way of a direction to the second respondent to conduct interview and issue eligibility certificate for admission to Engineering course in the NCC quota. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the second respo0ndent. The appellant's grievance is that appellant was not called for interview by the second respondent and so much so, he was not awarded any mark in the interview which led to the low ranking in grading for the purpose of admission. However, standing counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that evaluation is done by performance in NCC and out of 500, only 10 marks are provided for interview. The marks awarded to the appellant based on performance in the NCC reflected in certificate and other documents is only 85 out of 490. The appellant has a case that he has got 105 marks which itself accounts for only 20% of the total marks. We do not know what purpose will be achieved by the W.A. 1246/2011 2 appellant getting even 60 or 70% ie. 6 or 7 marks in an interview because appellant will still be lying very low in the list prepared by the second respondent wherein the top scorer has got as much as 446 marks out of 500. We are told that only 30 seats are provided for NCC candidates and even if the appellant participated, we do not think he would have come anywhere near the eligible candidates. In any case, we direct the first respondent to consider the appellant's case if the candidates in the rank list prepared by the second respondent do not claim seats in the NCC quota. The writ appeal is dismissed with the above observation. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE). P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) knc/-