Meghna Pradhan v. National University of Advanced Legal Studies, The Vice Chancellor, National University of Advanced Legal Studies, and Gujarat National University

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN** **TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/25TH BHADRA, 1936** ## **WP(C).No. 18179 of 2014 (V)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER:** **--------------------------** **MEGHNA PRADHAN AGED 19 YEARS D/O.PRADHAN, MAY HOMES, FLT NO.S-2 YMJ ROAD, NORTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM ERNAKULAM.** **BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN** **RESPONDENTS:** **----------------------------** **1. THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ADVANCED LEGAL STUDIES REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, HMT COLONY PO KALAMASSERY KOCHI-683 503.** ## **2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR** - **NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LEGAL STUDIES, HMT COLONY PO KALAMASSERY KOCHI-683 503.** ## **3. GUJARATH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY** **REPRESENTED BY CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS GANDHI NAGAR GUJARATH - 532 005.** **R1-R2 BY ADV. DR.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No. 18179 of 2014 (V) ----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** ## **-------------------------------------** **EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ADMIT CARD FOR UNDER GRADUATE PROGRAMME ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER** **EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE NON CREAMY LAYER CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER** **EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF RANK LIST OF CLAT UG 2014KERALA MERIT** **EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 14-7-2014 CONTAINING PROVISIONAL RANK LIST.** ## **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS** **---------------------------------------** **EXT.R1(A): A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.06.2014 ADDRESSED TO THE VICE CHANCELLOR, GUJARAT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY** **EXT.R1(b): A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROFORMA FOR VERFICATION OF DOCUMENTS DATED 08.07.2014 ALONG WITH THE OBC THIYYA COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER** **EXT.R1(c): A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NORMS RELATING TO ADMISSION, INTAKE AND RESERVATION RELATING TO B.A LLB (HONOURS) COURSE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** **EXT.R1(d): A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. NUALS/A2/830/02/14 DATED 23/06/2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** **TRUE COPY** ## **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J** **- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 18179 of 2014** ## **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16[th] day of September, 2014** ## **J U D G M E N T** The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-inclusion of the petitioner in the category of OBC-Ezhava. The petitioner; by the writ petition prays for being accommodated in the said category, in the admission sought for, against such category; for the first year LLB course in the 1[st] respondent College. The petitioner's specific contention is that the petitioner belongs to the “Thiyya” Community, as has been certified by the competent authority as per Ext.P3. Neither the prospectus nor the application form has a category referred to as “Thiyya” and hence the petitioner, applied under the sub-category “Other Backward Hindus” as seen in Ext.P1. The petitioner hence contends that the WPC.18179/2014 : 2 : petitioner being a Hindu and a Thiyya; which community has not been specifically included either in the prospectus or in the application form had rightly applied under the category of “Other Backward Hindus”, since, “Thiyya” Community is notified as a backward community and Ext.P3 certificate has also been issued to that end. 2. The learned counsel for the first respondent, however, would point out specifically from the prospectus that, Ext.R1(c) clearly indicates that Ezhavas included Ezhavas, Thiyyas, Ishuvan, Izhuvan, Illuvan and Billava; as per Annexure IV. Hence, the petitioner ought to have applied under the category OBC/SEBC as indicated in Ext. P1 application, under the sub category Ezhava. The prospectus having clearly mentioned that Thiyyas are included under the sub-category Ezhava; the petitioner cannot take up a contention that the petitioner had correctly applied under the category “Other Backward Hindus”, is the argument. WPC.18179/2014 : 3 : 3. It is also evident from the counter affidavit that there is a different reservation for both categories; i.e, 9% for Ezhavas including Thiyyas and 5% to other Backward Hindus. The “Other Backward Hindus” are hence apportioned three seats, while the Ezahavas are apportioned six seats. One of the said seats has been kept vacant by an order of this Court in this writ petition. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner applied under the category “Other Backward Hindus” and the petitioner was ranked under that category, under Exts.P4 and P5 rank lists. The petitioner's contention that she classified herself as “Other Backward Hindus” only on account of the default of the University is belied by the clear admission made in Ext.R1(a). In Ext.R1(a) the petitioner conceded that the category indicated was her mistake. Even if bonafide; what the petitioner seeks would result in revamping the entire list, at least affecting the Ezhava candidates who now stand a chance to be admitted under WPC.18179/2014 : 4 : their quota. It is relevant that none of such candidates are impleaded herein. 5. For one, the petitioner has by herself committed a mistake in categorising herself as coming under “Other Backward Hindus” and the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked merely to rectify the follies committed by individuals. Then again, any one having a claim under Exts.P4 and P5 rank lists, to be admitted under the Ezhava category cannot be denied the same without hearing them. Equity is not a one-way street. 6. The petitioner having been found to be dis-entitled to be considered under Ezhava category for reason only of having applied under the category “Other Backward Hindus”, the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit. Writ petition stands dismissed and the first respondent shall take immediate steps to admit the next available candidate under the category. WPC.18179/2014 : 5 : 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner points to **2014(3)KLT 212 NRI Service and Educational Trust v. Kerala University of Health Services** , and submits that in a similar circumstance the candidate therein was permitted to produce the certificate later and continue in the course. In the said case, the candidate therein had applied under the reserved category but had not produced the caste certificate along with the application. The candidate got admitted in the NRI quota and later claimed reservation insofar as the qualifying marks. The College which admitted her claimed relaxation of marks entitled to OBC candidates to regularise her appointment. It was only in such circumstance that in considering the reduction of percentile for admission to the OBC that this Court directed production of the caste certificate. In the present case, however, the application itself was made under another category and now the petitioner seeks WPC.18179/2014 : 6 : revamping of the rank list; deeming her to be an applicant in a category under which she had not applied. The affected parties are also not impleaded. For all the above reasons the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and is dismissed. Sd/- ## **(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)** jma //true copy// P.A to Judge