IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17776 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- AISHWARYA M.S., D/O.SALVARAJ, MYTHRI NAGAR, ARATTUTHARA (PO), MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN - 670645. BY ADVS. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR SMT.NIKHILA SOMAN SMT.M.K.LEELA MUKUNDAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (G) SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF SPORTS AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 3. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE SPORTS COUNCIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 R1 TO R4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORG E VADEKKEL R3 BY ADV. P.V.S. SUDHER, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 17776/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE MARK STATEMENT DATED 23/05/2011. P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION TO PROFESSIONAL DEGREE COURSE - 2011. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21/01/2011. P4: COPY OF THE ADMIST CARD ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE RESULTS OF THE PETITITONHER IN KEAM-2011 CONDUCED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF HONOUR ISSUED BY COMMON WEALTH POWER LIFTING FEDERATION. P7: COPY OF THE FINAL LIST PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE TIRLE OF 'INDIVIDUAL EVENT'. P8: COPY OF THE FINAL LIST PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE TITLE OF 'TEAM EVENT'. P9: COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN 'INDIVIDUAL EVENT' AND 'TEAM EVENT' FOR MBBS/BDS. P10: THE DETAILS OF THE CANDIDATES INCLUDED IN 'INDIVIDUAL EVENT' PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR MBBS/BDS. P11: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 24/06/2011. P12: COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P13: COPY OF REPRESENTATION / COMPLAINT DATED 27/06/2011. P14: COPY OF REPRESENTATION / COMPLAINT DATED 28/06/2011. P15: COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE INDIAN POWER LIFTING FEDERATION DATED 12/09/2009. P16: COPY OF THE PAGE NO.83 OF THE ANNEXURE - 2 PROSPECTUS. svs ..............2/-.... ...2... WPC.NO.17776/2011 P17: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF ANNEXURE - XX. P18: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE NO.92-96. P19: COPY OF THE INCOME CERTIFICATE DATED 01/07/2011. P20: THE RELEVANT PART OF THE LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 06/07/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.17776 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, she belongs to Hindu Yadava community eligible for reservation in the category of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes. She passed 12th standard from the Central Board of Secondary Education in the year 2011. It is stated that she won gold medal in Commonwealth Weight Lifting Championship 2009 and hence, is entitled to benefit of reservation in the sports quota. 2. The Kerala Sports Council recommended the petitioner for admission to professional degree course and Ext.P7 is the list forwarded by the Sports Council. Grievance of the petitioner is that in Ext.P9 rank list published by the Entrance Commissioner for admission to Medical and BDS courses, petitioner's name was not included. W.P(C) No.17776 of 2011 2 3. Though she made Exts.P13 and P14 complaints to the Commissioner for Entrance Examination, the list was not revised. It is complaining of the above, the writ petition was filed. During pendency of the writ petition, Ext.P2 revised list was published by the Commissioner. This also does not include the name of the petitioner. 4. Contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that she is entitled to claim benefit of special reservation in the Sports Quota. It is contended that for candidates belonging to the SEBC category, minimum prescribed marks in the entrance examination was 40% and that since she secured 42%, she should have been included in the rank list. 5. In my view the petitioner can not succeed in this writ petition. First of all admission to sports quota is covered by provisions of 5.2 in the prospectus. The relevant portion of which reads as follows: “5.2 Claim for Special Reservation: i) Selection under special reservation categories for admission to MBBS and BDS courses In the case of special reservation seats W.P(C) No.17776 of 2011 3 earmarked for MBBS & BDS courses, which are filled on the basis of the rank in the Entrance Examination, only those candidates who have scored 50% marks in the Medical Entrance Examination for Paper I & II together with applicable relaxation for SC/ST/SEBC/PD categories (as per directives of MCI) and secured rank within seven fold of the total number of MBBS & BDS seats in Professional Colleges/Institutions available for allotment through CAP 2011 will be considered for admission.” 6. A reading of this provision shows that, the candidates for admission in the sports quota should have secured minimum 50% marks in the entrance examination. Even according to the petitioner, she secured only 42%. Contention of the petitioner is that, she is a SEBC candidate and since she has secured more than 40% marks, she is entitled to be included in the rank list. 7. A reading of Clause 5.4.2 of Ext.P2 prospectus shows that only those candidates, whose family is certified to have less than Rs.4.5 lakhs family income, are eligible for the benefits available to SEBC category. Ext.P3 shows that the annual income of the family of the petitioner is certified to be Rs.4,88,431/-. Therefore, the petitioner is not eligible for the benefits of SEBC category. Because of this reason W.P(C) No.17776 of 2011 4 the petitioner did not claim admission, extending her the benefits available to the SEBC candidates. Therefore, her assumed SEBC status cannot be of any use and if she is seeking admission in the sports quota, she should satisfy the requirements laid down in the prospectus for admission in the sports quota, viz. 50% marks in the entrance examination. This requirement the petitioner did not satisfy. In such a situation, the petitioner cannot say that she should get the benefits of concession available to SEBC candidates for admission in the sports quota. In other words, she cannot have the best of both. 8. For the aforesaid reasons I cannot accept the case of the petitioner and find fault with the respondents for having not included the petitioner in Exts.P9 or P10 rank lists. The writ petition fails and it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE W.P(C) No.17776 of 2011 5