Muhammed Ashique C.S. (minor) represented by father/guardian Sulaiman v. State of Kerala, Secretary, Board of Public Examinations, Pareeksha Bhavan, Thiruvananthapuram, and S.N.D.P. Higher Secondary School, Aluva

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2016/28TH ASHADHA, 1938** ## **WP(C).No. 20141 of 2016 (P)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------** **MUHAMMED ASHIQUE C.S, (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY FATHER/GUARDIAN SULAIMAN, CHERIYELIL HOUSE, PARUVAKKADU, VELIYATHUNADU, ALUVA, PIN 683511** **BY ADVS.SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P). SMT.K.K.SHEEBA** - **RESPONDENT(S)/ -------------------------1. STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695001** **2. THE SECRETARY BOARD OF PUBLIC EXAMINIATIONS, PAREEKSHA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695001** **3. THE S N D P HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, ALUVA ,REP BY ITS HEAD MASTER-683101 R1&2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.V.ELIAS R3 BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).No. 20141 of 2016 (P)** **----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **-----------------------** **P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER** **P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING THE FORWARDING OF THE APPLICATION DTD 18/11/2015** **P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DTD 18/5/2016 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT** ## **P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT** **P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2001 KHC 3514** ## **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS** **--------------------------------------** ## **Ext.R-2** - **(A) COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON 15.6.2016.** - **(B) COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION (PAGES 1 & 3) BY THE SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS.** - **(C) COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.6.2016.** - **(D) COPY OF THE PRE-PRINTED CERTIFICATE OF THE SSLC EXAMINATION.** **(E) COPY OF THE SSLC CERTIFICATE IN WHICH GENERAL KNOWLEDGE IS OPTED INSTEAD OF HINDU.** - **(F) COPY OF THE 22ND PAGE OF THE NOTIFICATION.** - **(G) COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE HEADMISTRESS.** ///True copy/// P.S. to Judge ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 20141 of 2016 ================== Dated this the 19[th] day of July, 2016 J U D G M E N T The case projected in this Writ Petition is as follows:- That the petitioner had appeared for the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC) examination conducted by the 2[nd] respondent Board of Public Examinations, Government of Kerala, with registration No.251564 during March, 2015 and that the result of the SSLC examination was published on 20.4.2015. That the petitioner had passed the said examination and had also received Ext.P-1 mark list dated 20.4.2015 making him eligible for admission to the higher secondary courses. That to utter shock and dismay, in Ext.P-1 rank list received, it was noted in the subject column “ _Hindi_ ”, the 2[nd] respondent had shown another subject “ _General Knowledge_ ” and that this was wrongly included, as the petitioner's subject was “ _Hindi_ ” and not “General Knowledge”. That the petitioner had applied for admission to Std.XI of the higher secondary course at 3[rd] respondent aided higher secondary school, but his application seeking admission to the said course was rejected on the ground that the subject relating to “ _Hindi_ ” has been wrongly shown as “ _General Knowledge_ ”. That accordingly the petitioner had lost one academic year and that he - : 2 :- had approached the 3[rd] respondent for correcting the wrong entry in Ext.P-1 wrong mark list, who had in turn forwarded his application dated 18.11.2015 to the 2[nd] respondent Board of Public Examinations, requesting correction in Ext.P-1 mark list, as evidenced Ext.P-2 dated 18.11.2015. That even in spite of Ext.P-2 dated 18.11.2015, the 2[nd] respondent had not corrected the wrong entry in Ext.P-1 mark list dated 20.4.2015 and therefore the petitioner was constrained to issue Ext.P-3 legal notice dated 18.5.2016 to the 2[nd] respondent, which was received by him as per Ext.P-4 on 23.5.2016. That due to the callous attitude of the 2[nd] respondent and due to inordinate delay caused in considering the application, the petitioner apprehended that his admission to Std.XI for the academic year 2016-17 would also be denied as the said correction in Ext.P-1 was not done. The petitioner further contends that, in the light of the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case Ritubala Soni v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. reported in 2001 KHC 3514, the 2[nd] respondent is bound to pay compensation to the petitioner, etc. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner had instituted the above Writ Petition (Civil) on 13.5.2015 with the following main prayers: - : 3 :- - “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2[nd] respondent to correct the wrong entry in Ext.P-1 mark sheet upon the application dated 18.11.2015 as revealed by Ext.P-2 within a time bound manner; - (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order directing respondents 1 and 2 to grant adequate compensation to the petitioner for the trauma caused to him; - (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order directing the 1[st] respondent to hold an enquiry to find out the actual person responsible for issuing Ext.P-1.” 2. Later the Writ Petition was amended so as to incorporate ## the following additional prayers: - “(iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order, directing the respondents to reserve a seat in 'S.N.D.P. Higher Secondary School, Aluva' for the petitioner. - (v) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order, directing the respondents to grant a compensation of Rs.1 lakh to the petitioner for the loss of 1 academic year and Rs. 25,000/- as litigational cost.” 3. When the Writ Petition had come up for admission on 17.6.2016, this Court had directed the 2[nd] respondent to ensure that expeditious steps are taken to effect necessary corrections in Ext.P-1 mark list of the petitioner, without any further delay and report compliance of that matter to the petitioner, as the admissions to the Plus Two courses even for the academic year 2016-17 were about to be concluded. At that stage, this Court had heard Sri.A.N.Rajan Babu, learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] respondent SNDP school, and the 3[rd] respondent, on the request of - : 4 :- this Court had agreed that one seat will be kept reserved for admitting the petitioner so as to accommodate him in one of the management seats of the said course of that school. 4. In compliance with the order dated 17.6.2016, the 2[nd] respondent had filed an affidavit dated 16.6.2016 in this case, wherein it has been inter alia stated that Ext.P-2 application for correction was received only on 18.11.2015, even though the petitioner should have submitted such application for correction immediately after the issuance of Ext.P-1 mark list and at least by the month of June, 2015. That further, for processing the said application for correction, the office of the 2[nd] respondent had specifically directed the petitioner to produce the SSLC mark list in original for replacing the certificate, as stated in the application. But that the applicant did not produce the original certificate thereafter. That the Chief Superintendent in the office of the 2[nd] respondent has acknowledged the fact that the mistake was committed while submitting the A-list of students and thereafter in compliance with this Court's order, the mistake was rectified and new print out of the certificate was issued on 15.6.2016 as per Ext.R-2(a). That though the petitioner had adequate time, he had not so far filed any - : 5 :- reply affidavit to controvert the averments in the said affidavit dated 16.6.2016 filed by the 2[nd] respondent. Therefore, the averments made in the said affidavit of the 2[nd] respondent that the petitioner was bound to submit the application for correction immediately after the issuance of Ext.P-1 and at least within the month of June, 2015 itself and that he had actually submitted the application belatedly as per Ext.P-2 only on 18.11.2015 and that in spite of the direction from the 1[st] respondent, the petitioner had not produced the original of the SSLC certificate thereafter and that this had caused the delay, remain uncontroverted. 5. The 2[nd] respondent has thereafter filed a comprehensive affidavit dated 7.7.2016, explaining as to how the mistake occurred due to the submission of the A-list by the school authorities concerned before processing of the petitioner's application for appearance in the SSLC examination for the year 2015, wherein it was erroneously shown in the said A-list issued by the school authorities concerned that the petitioner's subject was “ _General Knowledge_ ” and not “ _Hindi_ ”. Various other aspects have also been comprehensively stated therein. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submitted, on instructions - : 6 :- and on the basis of the affidavits filed by the 2[nd] respondent, that consistent practice is that the applicant, who receives SSLC certificate with any mistaken entries, should immediately thereafter approach the office of the 2[nd] respondent for appropriate correction and thereafter, the original of the SSLC certificate should also be submitted to the 2[nd] respondent for carrying out such correction expeditiously. Accordingly, the learned Government Pleader would thus urge that Ext.P-1 mark list is seen to have issued on 20.4.2015, but the application for correction for the said mistake was submitted only on 18.11.2015, which is admitted by the petitioner as evident from his reliance on Ext.P-2 dated 18.11.2015. It is also pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that the fact that the petitioner had submitted the application for correction only belatedly on 18.11.2015 is also specifically admitted by him in Ext.P-3. Sri.A.N.Rajan, learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] respondent Higher Secondary School submits on the basis of the instructions that, in the light of the orders passed by this Court, the school authorities have already granted admission to the petitioner in the Std.XI Class in “Computer Science” group for the academic year 2016-17. The learned Government Pleader has also submitted - : 7 :- that the corrected mark list has already been issued as per Ext.R-2(a) to the school authorities and this fact is also confirmed by the learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] respondent school. Therefore, in the light of the unrebuted pleas in the counter affidavits filed by the 2[nd] respondent as well as specific admission made by the petitioner that he had in fact filed the application for correction only on 18.11.2015, and as the petitioner had thereafter never bothered to ensure the forwardal of the original of SSLC certificate to the 2[nd] respondent, this Court is convinced that this is not a fit case to exercise the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Art.226 of the Constitution of India for considering any further steps in the matter and therefore all other prayers of the petitioner will stand declined. The corrected SSLC book has already been issued to the petitioner as per Ext.R-2(a) and the petitioner has also been granted admission to the Plus Two course in “Computer Science” group in the 3[rd] respondent school for the academic year 2016-17. In the light of these aspects, the Writ Petition stands disposed. Sd/sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE ///True Copy/// P.S. to Judge - : 8 :-