IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 4TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 7705 of 2011(K) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- C.T.AHAMED KABEER, OTHAYI, PERAKAMANA P.O., MALAPPURAM-676541. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., KOZHIKODE-673635. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, MADEENATHUL ULOOM ARABIC COLLEGE, P.O.PULIKKAL, MALAPPURAM, PIN-673637. BY SRI. SANTHOSH MATEW FOR R3. SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC. SMT. NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 & R2. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.7705/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD. 23.11.07. EXT. P2 : COPY OF LETTER DTD. 10.3.08. EXT. P3 : COPY OF REJECTION MEMO DTD. 21.10.08. EXT. P4 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE MINISTER OF EDUCATION. EXT. P5 : COPY OF LETTER DTD. 26.9.08. EXT. P6 : COPY OF ORDER DTD. 8.7.04. EXT. P7 : COPY OF ORDER DTD. 28.12.07. EXT. P8 : COPY OF ORDER DTD. 25.3.08. EXT. P9 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE R1. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7705 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein was appointed as Lecturer in Arabic in the College in which the 4th respondent is the Principal. Ext.P1 is the copy of the appointment order. It appears that the University rejected the proposal of appointment finding that the petitioner is over aged as per Ext.P3. 2. The petitioner's contention is that the upper age limit fixed has to be relaxed and various orders Exts.P6 to P8 have been produced to show that in respect of other subjects and Colleges, upper age limit has been relaxed by five years. Seeking for a similar benefit, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 representation before the Government. There will be a direction to the Government to take a decision on Ext.P9 within a period of two months. If the decision is in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner can move the University for grant of approval. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp