IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17096 of 2008(I) --------------------------------- PETITIONERS/PETITIONER: -------------------------------- 1. XAVIER MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW ALEXANDER, AGED 17 YEARS, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, MATHEW ALEXANDER, RESIDING AT C 37/9, MOHAN NAGAR SALAM, PIN:636030. 2. MATHEW ALEXANDER, RESIDING AT C 37/9, MOHAN NAGAR SALAM, PIN:636030. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP SRI.SADER E.REAZ RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, PRAJOE TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE B.M.C. P.O, THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM-682 021. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V.PRAMOD SRI. S. SUJIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 17096 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T I.A. No. 7196/08 is allowed. The petitioner is the minor son of the 2nd petitioner. the 1st petitioner applied for admission to Engineering Course in the College of the 2nd respondent under the 1st respondent in the NRI quota. Prospectus for admission was issued by the 1st respondent on 17.5.2008. The last date for submitting applications was on 3.6.08. The petitioner came to know about the notification inviting applications only during the last week of May. Immediately the petitioner obtained an application form on 28.5.08 and forwarded the filled up application on 1.6.08. The petitioners are aggrieved by the non-consideration of the application submitted by the 1st petitioner on the ground that it is belated. The petitioner has now produced Ext.P7 communication from the Department of Posts to the effect that the postal article was taken by the postman to the 2nd respondent for delivery on 3.6.08 along with four other articles. The security guard at the gate of the institution refused to take delivery of the same. When the postman insisted, the security guard took him to the Principal's office and the Principal told the postman that the acceptance of the applications is only up to 4.30 W.P.(C).No. 17096 OF 2008 2 pm and refused to take delivery. Thereafter postman delivered the article again on 4.6.08. The petitioner would submit that in view of the above facts the 1st and 2nd respondents cannot now refuse to consider the application of the 1st petitioner as belated. 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st and 2nd respondents also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of opinion that justice demands that 1st petitioner's application be considered as one properly submitted in time. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the 1st petitioner's application for admission to the Engineering course in the 2nd respondent's College in the NRI quota and to give him admission, if he is eligible on the basis of rank assigned to him in the selection process. The 1st petitioner shall forward a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition to the 2nd respondent for compliance. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE bkn/-