High Court of KeralaDivision Bench2015-09-30Dismissed

Govinda Babu Ambady & Gokul Babu Ambady (Minors) via Father OP Babu, Thrissur v. Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations (CEE), State of Kerala, The Admission Supervisory Committee, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Arch Bishop Mar Andrews Thazhath/Jubilee Mission Hospital Trust, Fr. Francis Pallikunath, Dr. Beeny Joseph, Dr. VK Ramankutty and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No. 29614 of 2015 (B)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: K. Surendra Mohan
Shaji P. Chaly
Judgment Date: 2015-09-30
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petition dismissed. The court held that admissions were conducted on inter se merit within each quota and that there were no vacancies after the third allotment; it declined to quash the records or disturb the allocation, observing that the petition was filed belatedly and that the process complied with merit-based norms.
Final Disposition: Dismissed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Govinda Babu Ambady
Gokul Babu Ambady

Respondents

The Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations (CEE)
State of Kerala, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, represented by the Secretary of Higher Education
The Chairman, The Admission Supervisory Committee, Ram Mohan Palace, High Court Campus, Kochi
Archbishop Mar Andrews Thazhat, Patron and Chairman, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Jubilee Mission Hospital Trust (A Venture of the Archdiocese of Trichur)
Fr. Francis Pallikunath, Director, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Jubilee Mission Hospital Trust
Dr. Beeny Joseph, Chief Executive Officer, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Jubilee Mission Hospital Trust
Dr. VK Ramankutty, M.D., Principal, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv. M. Dinesh (Sri M. Dinesh)

Counsels for Respondents

• Senior Government Pleader, Sri Roshan D. Alexander (for R1 & R2)
• Smt. Mary Benjamin, SC, Admission Supervisory Committee (for R3)
• Adv. Sri Kurian George Kannamthanam (Sr.) (for R4–R7)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petition, filed by two minor petitioners through their father, challenges the allocation of MBBS seats under the NRI quota at Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Thrissur for the 2015-16 session. The petition alleges that the admissions were fraudulently drafted and manipulated by enhancing marks for some candidates under the NRI quota, and that theCollege’s normalization of marks, as reflected in the records (Exts P7–P9), was not transparent. The petition cites the Supreme Court’s mandate in P.A. Inamdar & Ors v. State of Maharashtra & Ors (2005), arguing that admissions must be merit-based, and seeks a certiorarified mandamus to call for records, quash the disputed third allotment, and direct admissions to petitioners as per directives of the Apex Court. Counsel for the petitioners contends that merit has been sacrificed for “whims and fancies” of the College and that the lack of clarity in mark augmentation warrants interference. The respondents counter that allocations were made on inter se merit within each quota and that vacancies, if any, had been exhausted after the third allotment (Ext. P7). The court notes the timing (filing on 29.09.2015) and finds no vacancy to justify further admissions, ultimately dismissing the petition. It emphasizes merit-based admissions and transparency. Inamdar is cited as supporting authority for merit-based admission norms.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Inter se merit

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the NRI quota admissions to Jubilee Mission Medical College were manipulated, with marks allegedly enhanced for certain candidates, undermining the merit-based selection mandated for medical admissions. Relying on the Supreme Court’s directions in Inamdar, they contend that admissions should be based on merit, and that there is no transparent methodology disclosed for mark augmentation (as seen in Exts P7–P9). They seek a certiorarified mandamus to call for records, quash the disputed third allotment, and direct admission of the petitioners in vacancies under per-curial directives, arguing that the last date for admissions and the need for timely challenge warrant interference. They highlight discrepancies in Ext. P9 and argue that the college’s normalization process breached the Information Brochure. The petitioners assert the necessity of scrutiny of inter se merit across categories and pray for relief in line with Supreme Court jurisprudence on merit-based admission.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that the admissions were determined on inter se merit within each quota and that the authorities strictly followed category-wise rules (Open, Christian, Thrissur Arch Diocese, staff). They assert that Ext. P7 shows there were no vacancies post-third allotment and that only candidates with merit within predefined quotas were admitted. They emphasize that Christian quota and other category reservations were followed and that the detailed normalization methodology is not disclosed in the absence of vacancies. The respondents argue that the petition was filed belatedly and that the court should refrain from interfering where no vacancies exist and where the record supports merit-based allocation under the established quota system.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
P.A. Inamdar & Ors v. State of Maharashtra & Ors	(2005) 6 SCC 537	Positive	The Supreme Court decision in Inamdar is cited as supporting the principle that medical admissions should be based on merit; the judgment relies on this authority to justify merit-based admissions.

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 Govinda Babu Ambady & Gokul Babu Ambady (Minors) via Father OP Babu, Thrissur v. Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations (CEE), State of Kerala, The Admission Supervisory Committee, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Arch Bishop Mar Andrews Thazhath/Jubilee Mission Hospital Trust, Fr. Francis Pallikunath, Dr. Beeny Joseph, Dr. VK Ramankutty 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 MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/8TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 29614 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- ## PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. GOVINDA BABU AMBADY, - (MINOR) S/O.OP.BABU, REPRESENTED BY FATHER OP.BABU, NARAYANEEYAM,LAKSHMI NARAYANA ENCLAVE, KIZAKUMPATUKARA, THRISSUR - 680 005. 2. GOKUL BABU AMBADY, (MINOR) S/O.OP.BABU, REPRESENTED BY FATHER O.P. BABU, NARAYANEEYAM,LAKSHMI NARAYANA ENCLAVE, KIZAKUMPATUKARA, THRISSUR - 680 005. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS (CEE), 5TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF HIGHER EDUCATION 695 001. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE, RAM MOHAN PALACE, HIGH COURT CAMPUS, KOCHI - 682 031. 4. ARCHBISHOP MAR ANDREWS THAZHATH, PATRON AND CHAIRMAN, JUBILEE MISSION MEDICAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, JUBILE MISSION HOSPITAL TRUST, ( A VENTURE OF THE ARCHIDIOCESE OF TRICHUR) PB NO.737, BISHOP ALAPPAT ROAD, JUBILEE MISSION P.O., THRISSUR EAST - 680 005. P.T.O. WP(C).No. 29614 of 2015 (B) :-2-: 5. FR. FRANCIS PALLIKUNATH, DIRECTOR, JUBILEE MISSION MEDICAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, JUBILE MISSION HOSPITAL TRUST, ( A VENTURE OF THE ARCHIDIOCESE OF TRICHUR) P.B. NO.737, BISHOP ALAPPAT ROAD, JUBILEE MISSION P.O., THRISSUR EAST - 680 005. 6. DR. BEENY JOSEPH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JUBILEE MISSION MEDICAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, JUBILE MISSION HOSPITAL TRUST, ( A VENTURE OF THE ARCHIDIOCESE OF TRICHUR) P.B. NO.737, BISHOP ALAPPAT ROAD, JUBILEE MISSION P.O., THRISSUR EAST- 680 005. 7. DR. VK.RAMANKUTTY, M.D., PRINCIPAL, JUBILEE MISSION MEDICAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, JUBILE MISSION HOSPITAL TRUST, ( A VENTURE OF THE ARCHIDIOCESE OF TRICHUR) P.B. NO.737, BISHOP ALAPPAT ROAD, JUBILEE MISSION P.O. THRISSUR EAST - 680 005. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. ROSHAN D. ALEXANDER R3 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE. R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNAMTHANAM (SR.) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.T.O. WP(C).No. 29614 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- ## APPENDIX ## PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- - EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS ISSUED FROM THE 6TH RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF THE 1ST PETITIONER ISSUED FROM CBSE IN THE YEAR 2015. - EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF THE 2ND PETITIONER ISSUED FROM CBSE IN THE YEAR 2015. - EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF SELECTED APPLICANTS & WAITING LIST WILL BE PUBLISHED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT ON 18.06.2015. - EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE NRI CATEGORY ADMISSION 2015 (ALLOTMENT NO.1) OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 :A TRUE COPY OF THE NRI CATEGORY ADMISSION 2015 (ALLOTMENT NO.2) OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE NRI CATEGORY ADMISSION 2015 (ALLOTMENT NO.3) OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE ACTUAL RANK LIST OF CHRISTIAN CANDIDATES BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF PHYSICS CHEMISTRY BIOLOGY NORMALIZED 300 PUBLISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE ALTERNATION DONE BY THE 4TH TO 6TH RESPONDENT IN THEIR SITE. - EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERS. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE St/- # **K. SURENDRA MOHAN & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.** -------------------------------------------------- ## **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 30[th] day of September, 2015** ## **JUDGMENT** ## _**Surendra Mohan, J**_ **.** The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: _“(i) Issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for all the records relating to the selection list and allotment order to MBBS Course in 'Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Thrissur-680005, Kerala State, under the NRI Quota for the academic year 2015-2016; which has been fraudulently drafted and manipulated with enhanced contribution of marks for some of the selected candidates under the NRI Quota for the academic year 2015-2016 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to allot seats to the Petitioners (1) and (2) in MBBS Course for the year 2015-16 in seats created as per the directions of the Supreme Court in Appeal (Civil) 5041 of 2005, “P.A.Inamdar & Ors v. State of Maharashtra & Ors on 12 August, 2005”._ _(ii) Issue a writ of seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the allotment order of the respondents and quash the same in so far as the Petitioners (1) and (2)'s Physics Marks have been fraudulently entered_ 2 **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015** _even after the detailed scrutiny to assess the relative merits of the candidates before being selected for admission; claimed to be undertaken in the with submitted records of Marks List of the Petitioners (1) and (2) as per the Information Brochure & Instructions to the applicants. Such grant other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.”_ 2. According to the petitioners, they had applied for admission to the M.B.B.S Degree Course conducted by the 'Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Thrissur', for the academic year 2015-2016. The petitioners had sought admission in the quota reserved for Non Resident Indians (NRI quota, for short). According to the petitioners, their applications were considered and the College had adopted a normalization procedure in respect of the marks obtained by them at the qualifying examination and had ranked them according to their merit. Ext.P7 reflects the position of the petitioners, at the time of the third allotment. Ext.P7 is dated 04.07.2015. The names of the petitioners appear as Sl.Nos.1 and 5 in the Waiting List of the category “Open Merit”. The petitioners complained that though Sl.Nos.5, 6 and 7 in the Open Category who were admitted, as evident from Ext.P7, **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015** 3 are also persons who have been allotted 95.33 marks, the petitioners who have been allotted the very same marks have been excluded while granting admission. It is further pointed out that, various other persons who were ranked below them have been admitted, as evident from Ext.P9, under the quota for Christian community. The procedure adopted by the College is, according to the petitioners, arbitrary and liable to be set aside. 3. According to Advocate Sri. M. Dinesh, who appears for the petitioners, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has in _**'P.A. Inamdar & Others v. State of Maharashtra & Others**_ ' [(2005) 6 SCC 537] held that, such admissions should be solely based on merit. In the present case, according to the learned counsel, merit has been the casualty and admissions have been made in accordance with the whims and fancies of the College. It is contended that, there is absolutely no indication as to the manner in which marks had been added on or reduced in the case of various candidates, as visible in Ext.P9. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, this is a fit case in which interference with the admission process is expedient. 4 **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015** 4. Sri. Kurian George Kannamthanam, learned Senior Counsel appears on behalf of Respondents 4 to 7 having been served with a copy of the writ petition. Smt. Mary Benjamin appears for the 3[rd] Respondent. Learned Senior Government Pleader, Sri. Roshan D. Alexander appears for Respondents 1 and 2. The matter is posted before us for admission. We have heard the respective counsel. 5. In the first place, the petitioners have filed this writ petition only on 29.09.2015. The matter has been posted before us today, the last date stipulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for completing admissions to Medical Courses. We notice from Ext.P7 that, the same relates to the third allotment that was conducted by the College wherein the petitioners have been ranked as Nos.1 and 5 in the Waiting List. According to the learned Senior Counsel Sri. Kurian George Kannamthanam, there were no vacancies available, after the said date in the NRI Quota. Therefore, absolutely no occasion for making any further admissions on the basis of Ext.P7 had arisen. Had the complaints of the petitioners been genuine, they should have filed the writ petition sufficiently early, so as to have enabled the Respondents to contest the **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015** 5 case put forward. According to the learned Senior Counsel, six Open Category seats out of 15 seats available under the NRI Quota, are reserved for the students belong to the Christian Community, five seats are reserved for candidates belonging to Christian Community. Two seats are reserved for students belonging to Thrissur Arch Diocese. Two seats are reserved for the children of Staff. The seats have been filled up following the above categorization, strictly on the basis of _inter se_ merit of the applicants in the said category. The details of the normalization process of marks adopted, are not available and there is also no time for obtaining instructions in that regard. Had the petitioners been serious, they would have approached this Court sufficiently early. 6. In view of the above, we accept the explanation of the learned Senior Counsel that the persons who have been admitted in the respective Quota reserved for each category were admitted on the basis of the _inter se_ merit among the applicants in each category. The petitioners belong to the Open Category. Since no seats had fallen vacant after the date of Ext.P7 and no other candidate having lesser marks than the writ petitioner has been admitted in the Open 6 **W.P.(C) No.29614 of 2015** Category, we find no substance in the complaint raised. For the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- **K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE** Sd/- **SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE** //true copy// P.S. to Judge St/30.09.2015