IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18136 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANUSHA.A.V,VANAJAM,KAMANKUZHY, ESTATE.PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-19. BY ADV. SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL SRI.S.VISHNU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,5TH FLOOR,HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ....................... W.P.(C).18136/2009 ....................... Dated this the 16th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who claims to belong to the Latin Catholic Community, which is entitled to benefits of reservation under the category SEBC, participated in the Entrance Examination for Engineering Degree Course, 2009. Column 7 in the application form requires a candidate to mention his or her caste. Petitioner had given it as Christian and Latin Catholic other Anglo Indian. Column 15 of the application provides for community certificate to be filled up in the manner prescribed by those candidates who claim reservation. According to the petitioner, she had claimed the benefit of community reservation. But it is an admitted fact that no community certificate was incorporated as part of the application. The claim was actually made by the petitioner after the list was published. 2. Respondents have taken a stand that the absence of a community certificate in the manner prescribed in the W.P.(C).18136/09 2 prospectus stands in the way of a candidate claiming the benefit of SEBC reservation. This decision taken by the Government has been considered and upheld by a Bench of this Court in Simi Raj v. Commissioner for Entrance Examinations (1999 (3) KLT 773). In these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and hence the same is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs