IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 8020 of 2008(D) PETITIONERS: 1. JINURAJ R., KOLLATAZHIKSTHU VEEDU, THALACHIRA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. 2. PRIYA S.R., PRIYA NIVAS, KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM. 3. NIHA RANJAN, NISHES, POLIKKODU, VAYAKKAL P.O. 4. LAISY I.J., NANCY MANZIL, THUDAYANNOOR P.O., MANALUVATTOM, KADAKKAL. 5. ASWATHY RAJ, ARUN BHAVANAM, KATTAYIL, ODANATTOM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.PRATHEESH.P RESPONDENTS : 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 8248 OF 2008 WPC NO. 10840 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 8020/2008. ------------------------------------------------------------------ EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 14-9-2004. EXT.P2 NOTIFICATION DT. 24-4-2007. EXT.P3 COMMUNICATION DT. 6-6-2007. EXT.P4 COMMUNICATION DT. 29-5-2007. EXT.P5 JUDGMENT IN W.P.C. 21880/2007. EXT.P6 ORDER DT. 1-11-2007. EXT.P7 COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO. 31410/2007. EXT.P8 ORDER DT. 18-1-2008. EXT.P9 REPRESENTATION DT. 4-3-2008. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) Nos. 8020, 8248 & 10840 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioners in W.P(C) Nos. 8020 and 8248 of 2008 are students admitted to T.T.C Course in private institutes during the year 2007- 08. the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 10840 of 2008 is an institute conducting TTC Course who have admitted students irregularly for the same year. In these writ petitions, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to permit the irregularly admitted students for the TTC Course for which they have been admitted. Their admissions became irregular because the students did not possess the minimum qualifying marks of 50% in the qualifying examinations. They seek the relief prayed for on the ground that the Supreme Court of India has, in similar writ petitions, permitted similarly placed students to continue their studies. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. The minimum marks of 50% for the qualifying examination is fixed by the NCTE. Even the Supreme Court has held that the State Governments have no power to dilute the qualifications so prescribed by the authorities like the NCTE. That being so, it is settled law that admissions for TTC Course in Kerala shall only be in accordance with the criteria fixed by the NCTE. 50% marks in the qualifying examination is the minimum qualification prescribed by the NCTE is not disputed. It is also not disputed before me that the students involved in these writ petitions do not possess 50% marks in the qualifying examination. The NCTE has fixed this minimum criteria for ensuring standards of education in the country. When the Supreme Court itself holds that State Governments cannot dilute such minimum W.P.C. No. 8020/08 etc., -: 2 :- criteria fixed by institutions like NCTE, I do not think that this Court can pass orders regularising admissions made in violation of the minimum qualification prescribed by the NCTE. That would also lead to reduction of standards of education in the State which cannot be permitted. When such minimum qualification has been prescribed and admissions have been made violating those minimum qualifications, if such admissions are allowed to be regularised, that would encourage unscrupulous managements to make admissions in violation of the standards prescribed in future also and later claim that since they have already been admitted, they may be allowed to continue their studies. A large number of writ petitions are coming before this Court for similar reliefs. In fact, in two of these writ petitions, there are a total of 15 petitioners who have been so admitted without possessing the minimum qualification prescribed. If all these admissions are regularised, the future of the children whom these students passing T.T.C. have to teach would be in serious peril. Such situation cannot be permitted in law in the interest of educational standards in the State which knowledgeable persons are lamenting, is going down day by day because of wrong policies. 4. The contentions raised by the petitioner on the interim order of the Supreme Court is also misplaced. Such powers are vested solely with the Supreme Court in exercise of its constitutional powers to do justice in a particular case which power the High Courts do not have. The question as to whether the admission of the students not possessing the minimum marks of 50% can be regularised has already been held against such students by this Court, which has been confirmed in writ appeal also. That being so, this Court cannot now W.P.C. No. 8020/08 etc., -: 3 :- countenance such admissions. Therefore, I do not find any merit in these writ petitions and accordingly the same are dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/