IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 26886 of 2005(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- TITTO FRANCIS AUGUSTINE, S/O.O.J.AUGUSTINE, CHUNGAKAROTT HOUSE, PARAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.SATHISH NINAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, KERALA STATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, K.V.M.COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, K.V.M.TRUST, P.B.NO.30, CHERTHALA-688 524, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. K.V.M.SOCIETY FOR PAIN & PALLIATIVE CARE (REG.NO. 708A), K.V.M.TRUST, P.B.NO.30, CHERTHALA-688 524, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNAMTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 R1 BY SR.G.P. SRI.A.K.ARAVINDAKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26886 of 2005(A) PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1:- COPY OF ADMISSION MEMO DTD.18.12.2001 ISSUED BYTHE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- COPY OF FEES DETAILS FOR 1ST YEAR MCA COURSE FOR STUDENTS UNDER PAYMENT SEAT QUOTA ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF RECEIPT DTD.7.8.2001 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER'S FATHER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.1.3.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXTS: EXT.R2(a):- COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 29.10.2001 OF K.V.M.COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. /TRUE COPY/ SD/- P.A.TO JUDGE cms P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 26886 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the non- refunding of the security deposit made in connection with the M.C.A course, which is lying with the 2nd respondent. Many a ground has been raised in the writ petition, which however have been rebutted by the 2nd respondent. 2. During the course of hearing, it is pointed out by Mr.Kurian George Kannathanam, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent that, if the petitioner approaches the 2nd respondent by filing a proper request in this regard, the same will be considered, taking a lenient view, as a gesture of goodwill. 3. In the above circumstances, it is for the petitioner, to approach the 2nd respondent by filing proper representation with W.P.(C)No. 26886 OF 2005 2 a copy of this judgment for taking appropriate steps. No further orders are necessary. Writ petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dmb