IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27565 of 2010(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ANILA B.S. (MINOR), BALAGOWRY BHAVAN, PALLIMON, KOLLAM-691 676, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SHOBHANA D., D/O. RAMAKRISHNA ACHARI, BALAGOWRYBHAVAN, PALLIMON, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR SRI.PRATHEESH.P SRI. K.SIJU SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR, LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, NANDAVANAM, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT NURSING COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SC, LBS CENTRE R2 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 27565 of 2010 U ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T In response to Ext.P7 prospectus published for admission to various courses including B.Sc Nursing, the petitioner submitted her application seeking admission in the physically handicapped quota. It is stated that, by Ext.P2 allotment memo, she was granted admission and she joined the course as well. Subsequently, the petitioner was informed that her admission was cancelled vide Ext.P4. It is challenging Ext.P4, this writ petition is filed. 2. The petitioner submits that going by the provisions of Ext.P7 prospectus, a candidate with 40% disability is eligible for admission in the quota for physically handicapped. It is stated that Ext.P5 certificate of disability certified her disability at 40% and, therefore, being an eligible candidate, her admission could not have been cancelled. However, Clause 5(3) of the prospectus provides that 40% is the minimum disability required for admission and that a State Level Committee will be constituted by the Government in the manner as provided in sub-clause (4), which will examine and assess the disability of the candidates, who are provisionally included in the physically handicapped category. It is stated that only those candidates, who are having minimum 40% disability as assessed by the Committee WPC.27565/10 : 2 : will be admitted for the course. Ext.P4 shows that a Committee as provided in the prospectus was constituted and the Committee examined the petitioner and assessed that she has only 14% disability. It is stated that it was therefore the petitioner’s admission was cancelled. 3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that in terms of the provisions of the prospectus, the disability of the petitioner was assessed and disability was found to be only 14%. If that be so, the petitioner does not have the minimum required 40% disability in order to enable her to seek admission in the physically handicapped quota. Therefore, in terms of the prospectus, her admission was liable to be cancelled and it is what has been done by Ext.P4. I do not find any illegality warranting interference. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks