Sasikala.M v. The Vice Chancellor

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.04.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN M.Sasikala ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Vice Chancellor, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The Registrar, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai - 600 028.

3.The Chairman, Law Admissions (2023-2024), The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai - 600 028.

4.The Principal, Mugil College of Law, Athencode, Padanthalumoodu Post, Killiyoor Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 1/4

3 herein to take appropriate action as against the 4th respondent herein and to direct the 4th respondent herein to permit the petitioner to continue her studies in 3 year LL.B Degree course for the academic year 2023-2026 by allotting a seat in the management quota on the basis of her representation made before the respondents by RPAD dated 23.01.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss, Standing Counsel for R1 to R3.

No appearance for R4.

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 3. Though the fourth respondent has been served, they have not chosen to enter appearance. 2.The petitioner states that she had paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- and that she was offered a seat in the three year law degree course by the fourth respondent. Her allegation is that after allotting seat under the management quota, she was not permitted to join the course. No material has been produced to show that the petitioner was admitted. What has been enclosed in the typed set of papers 2/4

is remittence to the tune of Rs.15,000/- in the bank account of the fourth respondent. This material is absolutely insufficient. It is open to the petitioner to sue the fourth respondent for recovery of the said amount of Rs.15,000/-. 3.With this liberty to the writ petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

03.04.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias 3/4

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

ias 03.04.2024 4/4