IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9383 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MASTER KURUVILA. T MANI, REPRESENTED BY FATHER AND GUARDIAN BOBBY MANI. T., S/O.M.O. MANI, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT THANNICKAL HOUSE, PAKKIL P.O., NATTAKOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.KARJET KODUVATH, SRI.S.NIDHEESH, SRI.K.VIDYASAGAR. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE COUNCIL OF EDUCATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING (SCERT), VIDHYA BHAVAN, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 012. 2. THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, STATE COUNCIL OF EDUCATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING (SCERT), POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-12. 3. THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING, NEW DELHI-110 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, SCERT. R3 BY ADV. MR.P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G. OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 9383 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 4th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T Although several issues are raised in this writ petition, when the matter was taken up for hearing, counsel for the petitioner confined his submissions mainly regarding the alleged non implementation of Ext.P2 by the 1st respondent. According to the petitioner, in the matter of conduct of National Talent Search Examination, several irregularities were detected and that led to Ext.P2 report by the 3rd respondent. It is his grievance that despite having received Ext.P2, suggestions in Ext.P2 have not been implemented by the 1st respondent. Though this submission has been contradicted by the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, in the statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, this grievance of the petitioner is not specifically answered. 2. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 1st respondent will consider Ext.P2 report of the 3rd respondent and take a decision on the implementation of the suggestions mentioned therein. This the 1st respondent shall do, as WPC No. 9383/11 :2 : expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp