High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2020-11-26Writ petitions dismissed; no relief granted to ...

Devina P. v. Commissioner for Entrance Examinations and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P.V. ASHA
Judgment Date: 2020-11-26
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petition dismissed. The court held that petitioners failed to comply with documentary requirements in the prospectus and cannot seek relief under Article 226; the matter aligns with earlier dismissals and Division Bench affirmations in related appeals.
Final Disposition: Writ petitions dismissed; no relief granted to the petitioner.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Devina P.

Respondents

The Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations
State of Kerala, represented by the Chief Secretary
The Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government Secretariat

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• P.U. Shailajan
• V. Sreejith
• Smt. Vidya KuriaKose

Counsels for Respondents

• V. Manu, Senior Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

Devina P., a 19-year-old applicant from Kannur, challenged KEAM/NEET (UG) admission processes, claiming she belonged to the OEC Kulala community and had produced a Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) certificate (Ext.P3) and later Ext.P11 (dated 18.11.2020) to evidence her status. She contends that, despite a good NEET score (325/720) and a state medical rank of 23488, she was treated as General Category and seeks inclusion in the Other Eligible Candidates (OEC) reservation for future allotment. The first respondent, the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, reportedly told her that the NCL certificate must be issued for State Education purposes, creating a basis for her claim under Ext.P11. The court reviewed a series of prior cases, including W.P.(C).No.21474/2020 and connected petitions, where petitioners were dismissed for not uploading required documents as mandated by the prospectus (clause 5.4.2 and annexed G.O. provisions). It relied on Sainulabdin v. State of Kerala to affirm that failure to submit documents renders the application defective and cannot be remedied under Article 226. The court concluded that petitioners had not complied with the documentary requirements and that no relief could be granted. The judgment is consistent with Division Bench affirmations in related writ appeals (e.g., W.A.No.1404/2020). Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Provisions of Law Cited

Clause 5.4.2(a) and (b) of the prospectus published on 02.02.2020Annexure V of G.O.(P) No.1/2015/BCDD dated 19.01.2015Article 226 of the Constitution of India

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that she belongs to OEC-Kulala and was registered as KN–OE–Kulala. She produced Ext.P11 NCL certificate dated 18.11.2020 and seeks inclusion in the OEC reservation for future allotments based on that certificate, highlighting purported misclassification in KEAM/NEET results and requesting relief under Article 226.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that the certificate should be in the prescribed state-education format and that past judgments, including those in W.P.(C).No.21474/2020 and connected cases, mandate dismissal where certificates were not uploaded timely; they argue that the petition does not warrant relief, citing jurisdictional deadlines and the need to adhere to the prospectus conditions.

Cited Precedents (7)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sainulabdin v. State of Kerala	[1995 KHC 362]	Positive	Held that failure to submit income certificate in the prescribed form would render the application defective and relief under Article 226 cannot be granted for such a defective application.
Chairman NRI Service and Educational Trust v Kerala University of Health Service and others	[2014(3) KLT 312]	Mentioned Only	Counsel relied on this decision for treating the petitioner as eligible for reservation; the court did not accept this contention.
W.P.(C).No.21474/2020 and connected cases	—	Positive	The petitioners in these cases were dismissed for failing to upload requisite documents; the present court relies on these outcomes.
W.A.No.1080/2020	—	Positive	Division Bench dismissed similar contentions; cited as authority for dismissing the present petition.
W.A.No.1183/2020	—	Positive	Same as above; used to reinforce the dismissal of similar claims.
W.P.(C).No.16518/2020, 17368/2020 and 20844/2020	—	Positive	Similar claims rejected in these petitions; supports the present decision.
Writ Appeal No.1404/2020	—	Positive	Judgment affirmed by Division Bench on 28.10.2020, reinforcing dismissal.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Devina P. v. Commissioner for Entrance Examinations and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M)** ## **PETITIONER:** **DEVINA P., AGED 19 YEARS D/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, PANAKKADA HOUSE, PERINGALAYI, KAPPAD P.O.,KANNUR DISTIRCT, PIN-670008.** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN SRI.V.SREEJITH (K/1398/2000) SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, 5TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3 THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** ## **BY SRI.V.MANU, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 2** ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 26th day of November 2020** The petitioner applied for KEAM as well as NEET (UG) Examination. It is stated that she belongs to OEC - Kulala Community. She has produced Ext.P3 Non-Creamy Layer Certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 4.12.2019. Producing Ext.P4 confirmation page of KEAM 2020, petitioner claims that she was registered as one belonging to KN– OE–Kulala and had produced Non-Creamy Layer Certificate, Community Certificate, Income Certificate etc. It is stated that she got 325 out of 720 marks as per Ext.P8 Score Card of NEET (UG) Examination and her Kerala State Medical Rank is 23488. It is stated that when the results were published, she was seen included in General Category. Therefore, she submitted an email to the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations on 17.11.2020 and got Ext.P11 Non-Creamy Layer Certificate, dated 18.11.2020 from the Village Officer. It is stated that she received a communication Ext.P10(a) informing her that the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations would accept only the NonCreamy Layer Certificate issued for State Education purpose. Petitioner ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 3** got Ext.P11 Certificate thereafter. Stating that the allotment is going on and a person with rank No.23559 got admission to BDS, which can be seen from Ext.P13, petitioner claims that she being Rank No.23488, is entitled to get allotment to BDS in preference to the candidate already allotted in Ext.P13. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to include her in the reservation category of Other Eligible Candidates on the basis of Ext.P11 Non-Creamy Layer Certificate issued on 18.11.2020 for the purpose of future allotment. 2. I have considered a series of cases where the students had approached this Court even before the publication of the results of NEET (UG) and all those cases were dismissed. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.21474/2020 and connected cases, in which a similar issue was considered, read as follows: _“8. It is seen that none of the petitioners have produced the certificates as required in clause 5.4.2(a) and (b) of the prospectus which was published on 02.02.2020, where it is specifically stated that they have to upload the certificates as required in Annexure V of the G.O.(P) No.1/2015/BCDD dated 19.01.2015_ ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 4** _and that they should invariably upload the non-creamy layer certificate in the prescribed format for State Government Education purpose obtained from the Village Officer concerned. As rightly pointed out by Sri. V. Manu the learned Senior Government Pleader, there was sufficient time available for the petitioners to apply and obtain the certificate along with their application itself before 29.02.2020 well before the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and even thereafter when opportunities were provided several times till 24.09.2020 each time alerting that no further opportunity would be given. Though it is quite unfortunate for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 21474 of 2020, that she could not avail the opportunity made available from 24.09.2020 to 28.09.2020 when her application was pending from 11.09.2020, a further opportunity cannot be directed to be given to the candidates by this court, when the competent authority has fixed the dates and has given multiple chances to the candidates. Those who apply for professional degree courses should be vigilant enough to submit their applications along with the requisite documents as required in the prospectus. Along with the application the candidates are submitting a declaration (as seen from the confirmation page) to the effect that they have downloaded and read various clauses in the prospectus_ ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 5** _and agreeing to abide by them. In case they had read and understood the provisions in the prospectus properly they would have submitted the relevant certificates along with the application itself or would have got it cleared when opportunities were given further._ _9. Moreover similar claims of candidates who did not upload the requisite documents at the relevant time were rejected by the Division Bench, after elaborately considering the procedure adopted by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations and with reference to the case law on the subject in the judgments in W.A.No.1080/2020 and W. A.No.1183/2020 respectively. In the judgments in W.P. (C).No. 16518/2020, 17368/2020 and 20844/2020 also similar claims were rejected. It is also pertinent to note that in the judgment in Sainulabdin v. State of Kerala [1995 KHC 362], relied on by the learned Government Pleader, the Division Bench of this Court has held that failure to submit the income certificate in the form prescribed for that purpose, as provided in the prospectus, along with the application would render the application defective and the candidate cannot seek a remedy on the strength of such a detective application under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the light of the judgment also petitioners cannot be granted any_ ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 6** _relief. Though Sri. Praveen, the learned counsel for the petitioner in one of the writ petitions relied on the judgment reported in Chairman NRI Service and Educational Trust v Kerala University of Health Service and others [2014(3) KLT 312] and argued that the petitioner should be treated as a candidate eligible for reservation, in the light of the judgments of the Division Benches in 1995 and also in 2020, the said contention cannot be accepted. There are sufficient number of candidates who have submitted the valid claims for reservation uploading the requisite documents at the relevant time._ _In view of the above circumstances, I am of the view that petitioners do not reserve any relief in these writ petitions. Accordingly these writ petitions are dismissed.”_ The said judgment is affirmed by the Division Bench by judgment dated 28.10.2020 in Writ Appeal No.1404/2020. In view of the aforesaid judgments, petitioner, who was also not vigilant enough to avail the opportunities, is also not entitled to any relief in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. **Sd/-** **P.V.ASHA JUDGE** Bb/27/11/2020 ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 7** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**EXHIBIT P1**||**TRUE COPY OF THE 12TH STANDARD**| |---|---|---| |||**EXAMINATION (SCIENCE GROUP)MARK LIST OF**| |||**THE PETITIONER CONDUCTED BY THE CENTRAL**| |||**BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION IN THE YEAR**| |||**2018**| |**EXHIBIT P2**||**TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY**| |||**THE PETITIONER DATED 13.12.2019 AND**| |||**DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE NEET**| |**EXHIBIT P3**||**TRUE COPY OF THE NON-CREAMY LAYER**| |||**CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDER,**| |||**KANNUR DATED 4.12.2019**| |**EXHIBIT P4**||**TRUE COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION PAGE-KEAM**| |||**2020 DOWNLOADED FROM TH WEB SITE OF THE**| |||**1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.2.2020**| |**EXHIBIT P5**||**TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT REGARDING THE**| |||**PAYMENT OF FEES REMITTED BY THE**| |||**PETITIONER AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTING THE**| |||**APPLICATION**| |**EXHIBIT P6**||**TRUE COPY OF THE NON-CREMAY LAYER**| |||**CERTIFICATE DATED 16.12.2019 ISSUED BY**| |||**THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR TALUK**| |**EXHIBIT P7**||**TRUE COPY OF THE CASTE CERTIFICATE ISSUED**| |||**BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR TALUK DATED**| |||**12.12.2019**| |**EXHIBIT P8**||**THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCORE CARD OF THE**| |||**PETITIONER PUBLISHED IN THE WEBSITE DATED**| |||**16.10.2020**| |**EXHIBIT P9**||**TRUE COPY OF THE NEET(UG)-2020 RESULT**| |||**SUBMISSION REPORT DOWNLOADED FROM THE**| |||**WEBSITE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE**| |||**EXAMINATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT**| |**EXHIBIT P10**||**TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL SENT BY THE**| |||**PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED**| |||**17.11.2020**| |**EXHIBIT P10**|**(a)**|**TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION**| |||**ISSUED FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED**| |||**17.11.2020**| ## **WP(C).No.26125 OF 2020(M) 8** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NON-CREAMY LAYER CERTIFICATE DATED 18.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHELORA EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE OPTION LIST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST ALLOTMENT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE CATEGORY OF OEC DATED 6.11.2020** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL** _[True copy]_ _P.A to Judge_ Bb