IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37397 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SANDRA P., AGED 18 YEARS, OD/O. SRI.PREMANAND S., RESIDING AT 1/3870 A, 'SREKRIPA' EAST HILL ROAD, P.O WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 005. BY MR.O.V. RADHAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SMT.K.RADHAMANI AMMA, MR.ANTONY MUKKATH. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O. COCHIN-682 022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND ACADEMIC ADMISSIONS UNIT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O. COCHIN - 682022. 3. ASWIN K.M, 1ST SEMESTER STUDENT, B.TECH (INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY) SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, CUSAT THRIKKAKARA. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM,SC,CUSAT, R3 BY ADV. MR.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37397/2008-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE NO. 842/08 DTD. 25/07/2008 OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOZHIKODE TALUK. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME CERTIFICATE NO. 898/08 DTD. 25/07/2008 OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOZHIKODE TALUK. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS OF COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE CALL LETTER DTD. 30/07/2008. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE WAITING LIST OF IT1T-INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, THRIKKAKARA AS ON 06/11/2008. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE VACANCY LIST OF ENGINEERING COURSES PUBLISH IN THE WEBSITE OF THE CUSAT. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE WAITING LIST OF IT2T-INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, CUSAT KUTTANAD AS ON 06/11/2008. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ACADEMIC ADMISSION 2008 CLOSING LETTER PUBLISHED IN THE CUSAT WEBSITE. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.1 5/11/2008 OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ANNOUNCING IN THE COUNSELLING ON 17/12/2008 PUBLISH IN THE WEBSITE OF CUSAT. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE NEWS CLIPPING APPEARED IN METRO MANORAMA DTD. 01/01/2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE OPTION FORM SUBMITTED BY THIS RESPONDENT ON 30/07/2008 BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.R3.B: COPY OF THE FEE REMITTANCE SLIP DTD. 17/10/2008 ISSUED FROM THE R.1. UNIVERSITY TO R.3. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.37397 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Prayer in this writ petition is to quash the admission granted to the 3rd respondent to ITIP in the School of Engineering, CUSAT, Thrikkakara and also Ext. P10 notification. Further prayer is for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to grant admission to the petitioner against the vacancy notified in Exhibit P6, ITIP in the School of Engineering CUSAT, Thrikkakara reserved for OBH candidates from Ext. P5 waiting list on the basis of the counseling held on 11/11/2008. 2. Facts of the case are that in the B.Tech admissions 2008-09, the petitioner, an OBH candidate, appeared for the Common Admission Test. Exhibit P3 is the instructions to candidates. It is stated that the 3rd respondent, based on the option exercised, was admitted for B.Tech- IT2P at Pulincunnoo Engineering College and admission was granted on 18/08/2008. In spite of the admission thus granted, the 3rd respondent was retained in Exhibit P5 waiting list as on 6/11/2008, in which the petitioner is also included. W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 2 3. By Ext.P6, counseling for admission to the vacant seats in the B.Tech Programmes offered by the CUSAT in different disciplines was scheduled and one of the seats, shown as available was for ITIP OBH, at the CUSAT itself. It is stated that on 11/11/2008, despite the admission that was granted to him in Pulincunnoo Engineering College, the 3rd respondent was invited for counseling and was admitted in the one seat vacancy at CUSAT notified at serial no.10 of Exhibit P6. The University again issued Exhibit P10, inviting candidates in the rank list to fill up two vacancies mentioned therein, which includes the one vacated by the 3rd respondent from the Pulincunnoo Engineering College. It was on that stage, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who, would have got admission for ITIP OBH at CUSAT, but for the admission given to the 3rd respondent. 4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner relied mainly on clauses B and F of ExhbtiP3, which reads as under; “B. Counselling: At the counselling desk, the candidates can view on thee computer monitor, the different branches, the types ('free' and/or 'payment') and the categories W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 3 (general/reservation etc.) of seats available to them at the particular instant and select the course of their choice. A choice, once confirmed, shall be irrevocable and no change whatsoever shall be permitted. However, he/she can submit options as per the procedure prescribed below, under “options”. candidates who do not accept any or all of the seats available and offered to them at the time of counseling will be required to submit a declaration jointly with their parent/guardian to the effect that they are voluntarily relinquishing their claims to the said seats offered to them. Candidates refusing to submit this undertaking will not be permitted to move over to the next stage of the counselling process. F. Cancellation Of Options: Candidates admitted or shifted to any particular branch by virtue of options exercised by him/her at the time of counselling shall have to accept such admission/updation. However, he/she will be permitted to cancel his/her remaining options (if any) within five days of being admitted/updated. Requests for partial cancellation of higher options will not be entertained.” W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 4 5. According to the learned Senior Counsel, once the candidate exercises his choice and the choice is confirmed, it shall be irrevocable and no change whatsoever shall be permitted. It is stated in respect of such candidate, the options exercised by him will stand cancelled and if that be so, any seat which arises thereafter, cannot be claimed by him. It is stated that in spite of the position as above, ignoring the admission that was granted to 3rd respondent at the Pulincunnoo Engineering College, he was retained in the waiting list and invited for the counseling and admitted to the vacancy notified as per Exhibit P6. 6. On behalf of the University, a statement has been filed by the Standing Counsel, relevant portion of which reads as follows; “Since the aforesaid Engineering Colleges are located in two different districts, a candidate seeking admission in the University will have preference of one campus over other for a particular course. The allocation of colleges are also on the basis of rank W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 5 secured by the candidate in the Common Admission Test subject to the reservation rules, option and availability of vacancy reservation rules, option and availability of vacancy etc. In case a candidate does not get admission opted as his higher preference, it is open to such candidates to seek admission in any eligible course where there is a vacancy and submit an option to such admission which will be treated as their higher option. The claim of such candidate will be considered for admission subject to the eligibility in all future counseling conducted by the University unless they cancel the options. The explanation contained in Exhibit P3 is no way convey the meaning that a student admitted to any particular branch cannot be up dated to his higher options whenever vacancies arises in future.” 7. The University therefore, contends that even if the candidate exercises his choice and is admitted, in terms of clause B of Ext. P3, he is entitled to retain the higher options W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 6 and that if a seat falls vacant as per the higher option exercised by him, he is entitled to be called for the counseling and considered against vacancy. It is stated that this is the uniform procedure that is adopted by the University in respect of all admissions. 8. The correctness of the stand taken by the University depends upon the impact of clauses B and F of ExhbitP3. Clause B shows that though choice once confirmed shall be irrevocable and no change is permissible, the candidate still can submit option as per procedure prescribed in Exhibit P3. Clause F shows that once a candidate is admitted, and the admission is accepted, he will be permitted to cancel the remaining option within 5 days of admission. Thus on a combined reading of clauses B and F together, what emerges is that in spite of admission granted, candidate still can retain his options and its cancellation is at his option. If that be so after admission is. taken, he may retain higher options and if any seat falls vacant, as in this case, the admitted candidate is entitled to be invited for counseling. This is a reasonable interpretation of the aforesaid clauses of Exhibit P3 W.P.(C) No.37397/2008 7 and that precisely is what the Cochin University has adopted uniformly. Further, even if two views are possible and if what is adopted is one of the possible views , this Court will not be justified in interfering with the view so taken by the University. Further the consequence of accepting the interpretation canvassed by the petitioner will be that a candidate with higher rank initially allotted to a course or college based on a lower option exercised by him, will not be getting a seat for a course or a college depending upon his higher options, even if seat is available a later point of time and such seats will go to candidates lower in the Ranked list. This cannot be allowed to happen. If that be so admission granted to the 3rd respondent pursuant to Exhibit P6 notification, to the vacancy in the CUSAT cannot be faulted. Writ petition fails and hence, it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm