G. Rosalin vs The Principal, Holy Cross College (Autonomous) and The Registrar, Bharadhidhasan University

P. Jyothimani, J

The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.09.2010 made in W.P.(MD) No. 11350 of 2010, by which, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant for a direction against the first Respondent, the Principal of Holy Cross College (Autonomous), to permit her to continue and complete her study in the course of Bachelor of Rehabilitation Science. The Appellant was admitted in the said course in the academic year 2009-2010, which is for a period of three years and it appears that she has completed her first and second semester. During the course when she was studying second year, she was informed by the College Management that the Government has refused to grant exemption to her in respect of the relaxation of age limit. Admittedly, as per the Government Order, the Appellant has crossed the age of 24 years and, therefore, she was not eligible for admission.

It is the case of the Management that at the time of admission, she was a Christian and believing that the Government will grant exemption, the Appellant and Ors. were admitted. However, the Government, by virtue of the order passed by it, categorically stating that the age limit cannot be exempted for the purpose of admission to colleges, passed orders. It was taking note of the said fact that the Government has already passed orders and relying on a judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court, in Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Vs. K. Jotheeswara Pillai (D) by LRs. and Others, , wherein it was held that No. Mandamus can be issued to direct the authority to relax the upper age limit, the learned judge has dismissed the Writ Petition.

In our considered view, there is nothing to be interfered with the order of the learned Single Judge. However, the learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that the order passed by the Government has not been communicated to the Appellant. The learned Counsel for the first Respondent would submit that a copy of the order will be given to the Appellant''s counsel. It is always open to the Appellant to work out her remedy by challenging the said order, if so advised. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellant that in some other States like Pondicherry, the age limit is not insisted upon and if the Appellant seeks admission in one of the Colleges in the said State, it is always open to her to approach the authorities concerned, in which event, it is for such State authorities to consider the claim of the Appellant for admission and pass appropriate orders.

With the above observation, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No. costs.