IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 15408 of 2006(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ NEETHU RAPHEL, D/O.MOLLY RAPHAEL, ALUAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-6. BY ADV. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SCHOOL OF NURSING, INDIRA GANDHI CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-682 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL. 2. COCHIN CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL SOCIETY LTD.NO. E288, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-20, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. KERALA NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH FOR R1&2 SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU FOR R1&2 SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C.NO.15408/2006 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : PROSPECTUS ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 19.1.2006 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 29.3.2006 ISSUED TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R1A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DT. 1.10.2005 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15408 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 22nd August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayer :- “Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or direction, commanding the first and second respondents to return the academic records including SSLC Book, Mark list of Plus 2 course, conduct certificate etc. and to refund the amount paid by the petitioner.” It is seen that the petitioner has approached the third respondent as per Ext.P3. Learned counsel for the third respondent submits that the said respondent has not received Ext.P3. Since the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus she may file a fresh representation before the third respondent, in which event, the matter will be duly considered by the said respondent with notice to the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2, and appropriate action in accordance with law in the matter will be taken within another three months. It will be open to the petitioner to take all available contentions including the contention centering round on the decision reported in Saxena v. Balram Prasad [(2000(3) KLT 438 (SC)]. The writ petition is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. OP NO. 2 KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15408 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 22nd August, 2008.