IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17918 of 2011(L) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. NOUFAL M.K,HOUSE NO.2/691. KUNNUMPURAM,KOCHI-1 2. THANHAR M.Y, 2/948,MANAYATHIL HOUSE, FORT KOCHI P.O., KOCHI-682 001 3. THANSIL U.T,5/393,BANGLAW PARAMBU, MATTANCHERRY,COCHIN-2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.M.V.JOSEPH (ALAPPUZHA) RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686560 REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686560 3. KERALA SPORTS COUNCIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP.BY ITS SECRETARY-6869001 4. THE PRINCIPAL,COCHIN COLLEGE, COCHIN-682002 R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC., MG. UTY. R3 BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHEER, SC., SPORTS BY ADVS. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 17918/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PROSPECTUS (UO NO.1117/L/ACAD, DATED 25/02/2011) ISSUED BY THE 1SR RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF ADMISASION IN AFFILIATED COLLEGE. P2: COPY OF THE NORMS ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE KERALA STATE SENIOR BASEBALL CHAMPIONSHIP 2010 - 11 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE REVENUE DISTRICT CHAMPIONSHIP OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. P8: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF WRESTLING. P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 14/06/2011 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(a):COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 08/10/2007 FROM 4TH RESPONDENT TO REGISTRAR OF 1ST RESPONDENT. R4(b):COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 02/06/2009, ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. R4(c):COPY OF LETTER DATED 07/03/2011 FROM 4TH RESPONDENT TO SI OF POLICE, MATTANCHERY. R4(d):COPYOF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 09/03/2011. R4(e):COPY REQUEST DATED 06/06/2011 RECEIVED FROM A GROUP OF STUDENTS. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.17918 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioners claim to be sportsmen eligible for the benefit of reservation available in the Sports Quota. 2. On completion of Plus two course they submitted Exts.P3 to P5 applications for obtaining admission to degree course in the 4th respondent College. However, when the list of students were forwarded to the University, the 4th respondent excluded their names. Aggrieved by above the 2nd petitioner filed Ext.P9 representation before the 2nd respondent. It is thereafter this writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to ensure admission for the petitioners to any of the courses applied for by them as per Exts.P3 to P5 under the 4th respondent. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.9 forthwith; W.P(C) No.17918 of 2011 2 iii) declare that the petitioners are entitled to get admission under the sports quota in the 4th respondent college in view of the Exts.P1, P2 and P6 to P8 and give appropriate directions to the respondent to provide admission.” 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. In the nature of the issue that arises, I feel that the grievance of the petitioners can be redressed if the 2nd respondent considers Ext.P9 representation made by the 2nd petitioner treating it as a representation made on behalf of the other petitioners also. A decision as above shall be taken by the 2nd respondent as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioners to produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE W.P(C) No.17918 of 2011 3