IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25236 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- GEETHAKRISHNAN.P.K., STUDENT, M.PHIL IN DISABILITY STUDIES(MPDS), INTER UNIVERSITY CENTRE FOR DISABILITIES STUDIES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI.P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA SRI.N.MUHAMMAD SAJU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY IT'S SECRETARY TO HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP.BY ITS THE REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 560. 3. DR.RAZEENA PADMAM, HONORARY DIRECTOR, INTER UNIVERSITY CENTRE FOR DISABILITIES STUDIES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 560. SRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC FOR UNIVERSITY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.25236/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 26.8.11. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 5.9.11. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CHAPTER 1 AND CHAPTER 3 AS TO THESYLLABUS FOR M.PHIL. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PAPER REPROT IN INDIAN EXPRESS DAILY DATED 11TH JUNE, 2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DR.G.N.KARNA FROM THE NET. EXT.P5(a): TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION THE VICE CHANCELLOR FROM THE NET. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.SC/ST CELL/1/5654/2011 DT 8.8.11. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 4.3.11. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 25236 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 11th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a student of M.Phil in Disabilities Studies under the Inter University Centre for Disabilities Studies. He made Exts.P1, P2 and P7 complaints to the 2nd respondent making allegations against the 3rd respondent. 2. In this writ petition, the main complaint is that despite having received the said complaints, 2nd respondent has not initiated any action thereof. 3. When the case came up for orders on 26/9/11, learned standing counsel appearing for the University was directed to obtain instructions in the matter and accordingly it is submitted that, on receipt of the complaints, 2nd respondent has already called for remarks of the 3rd respondent, and that, on receipt of the remarks, necessary action in the matter will be taken. 4. From the submissions made by the learned standing counsel, it is therefore obvious that, on receipt of the complaints from the petitioner, necessary action in accordance with law is WPC No. 25236/11 :2 : being initiated. Therefore recording the submission and directing that action be expedited, writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp