Alsha Joseph vs University of Calicut

K. Surendra Mohan, J.—The case of the petitioner is that, she is a person who was scored 88% of marks in her Plus Two course. She wanted to get admission to the B.A. Degree course in English Literature. She had indicated her first preference as St. Aloysius College Elthuruth, Thrissur. Accordingly, she has been granted admission to the said College by the first respondent. But, after the petitioner was given admission, she came to know that she had indicated her preference erroneously by and without knowing that, the St. Aloysius College Elthuruth, Thrissur was a self financing college where the fees charged are much higher than that of a Government College. The petitioner being a person belonging to the financially weaker section of society, living below the poverty line (BPL), is not in a position to pursue her studies in the college to which she has been allotted. Because of her financial incapability, she has sought for an admission to the C. Achutha Menon Government College, Kuttanellur.

According to Sri. Santhosh Mathew, the learned Standing Counsel for the University, the petitioner has been given admission to the institution preferred by her as first choice. Once such an admission is granted, all her other choices would automatically get cancelled. The College to which the petitioner has been given admission being a self financing college, it is pointed out that, the petitioner''s seat would remain vacant for the current academic year, causing loss to the institution. The petitioner''s request for admission to the 4th respondent college also cannot be considered for the above reason.

Heard. Since the petitioner has been granted admission on the basis of the choice indicated by her, I do not find any infirmity in the action that is under challenge. However, the petitioner being a person belonging to the financially weaker section of the society, it is necessary to consider whether she could be accommodated in the 4th respondent College so as to permit her to pursue her studies. It is also worth noticing that the petitioner has scored 88% marks in her Plus Two course. Since Ext. P4 is pending consideration of the 2nd respondent, I am satisfied that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the said representation to be considered.

This writ petition is therefore, disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P4 representation submitted by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.