IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 32552 of 2005(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- V. SREEKUMAR, SREEKRISHNA, THULAVILA, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (FOR AND ON BEHALF OF HIS WARD S. SREEDEV). BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.SASITH PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, 5TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PRINCIPAL, SREE CHITHIRA THIRUNAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PAPPANAMCODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC FOR R1 SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dmb WP(C).No. 32552 of 2005 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1:- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27.9.2005 P2:- COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE BROCHURE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER AFFILIATION GRANTED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT COLLEGE P4:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE ACCEPTANCE OF RS.1,16,100/- ON 17.10.2005 P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 25.10.2005 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- R3(a):- COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR B-TECH DEGREE ADMISSION TO MANAGEMENT SEATS 2005-2006 R3(b):-COPY OF THE REPLY OF THIS RESPONDENT //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.32552 Of 2005 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF JANUARY, 2011 J U D G M E N T In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the 3rd respondent to return the amount received for admitting his son, covered by Exhibit P4. 2. This is a case where the petitioner's son Sreedev got admission to the B.Tech.Degree Course (Automobile Engineering) in the College of the 3rd respondent, which is affiliated to the 1st respondent-University. Exhibit P1 is the copy of the agreement executed at the time of admission. After joining the College, on getting admission in the Cochin University of Science and Technology, the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent for getting the transfer certificate. For getting the same, the tuition fee of Rs.1,16,000/- for the entire course had to be remitted, and in the light of the compulsion to obtain the transfer certificate, the said amount was paid. 3. According to the petitioner, it was not proper for the 3rd respondent-College to collect the entire tuition fee. W.P.(C)No.32552/05 -2- 4. In the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, it is pointed out that the College is not liable to refund the entire fee as the petitioner's son does not come within the purview of Common Entrance Centralised Allotment Process. Therefore, it is pointed out that the 3rd respondent is not bound to return the fee collected from the ward of the petitioner as per Exhibit R3(a). 5. Evidently, there is no statutory forum for enabling a resolution of a dispute like this. Apart from that, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent relies on the terms of the agreement. But the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even going by the terms of the agreement, the amount could not have been collected. The question therefore turns on the interpretation of the terms arrived at by parties in Exhibit P1. This is a matter outside the purview of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The 3rd respondent-College is a self-financing College. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it will come within the definition of other authority under Article 12 of the Constitution. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore W.P.(C)No.32552/05 -3- prayed that the petitioner may be allowed to move the Government in the matter, as there is no other alternate forum. 7. In that view of the matter, if the petitioner files an appropriate representation before the Government, the Government will take appropriate decision, with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation. The petitioner will file a representation along with a copy of this judgment before the Government. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-( T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn True copy P.A.to Judge