Anasiya Ashraf v. Mahatma Gandhi University
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/22ND PHALGUNA, 1936 WA.No. 600 of 2015 () IN WP(C).6763/2015 ------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) 6763/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 09-03-2015 --------------------- APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER :- ---------------------------- ANASIYA ASHRAF, AGED 22 YEARS D/O.ASHRAF, CHITTETHUKUDYIL HOUSE, ADIMALI P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :- ------------------------------
1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - - 686 560 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O. KOTTAYAM - 686 560.
3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O. KOTTAYAM - 686 560.
4. THE PRINCIPAL, JPM COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCE KANCHIYAR P.O., LEBBAKKADA, KATTAPPANA IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 511.
BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE MATHEW BY ADV.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN BY ADV.SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt
ASHOK BHUSHAN, Ag. C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
---------------------------------- W.A. No.600 of 2015 -------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March 2015
J U D G M E N T
Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University. 2.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 9.3.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.6763 of 2015. By the said order, the learned Single Judge had rejected the claim of the petitioner for provisional admission to the examination, which was to commence from 10th March, 2015, on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible to be admitted to the post-graduate course in English. The learned Single Judge has also directed the College to explain as to why an ineligible candidate was allowed to be admitted to the regular course, within ten days.
3.
The University had already filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner was not eligible for admission to the regular course.
W.A. No.600 of 2015 -: 2 :- 4.
Learned counsel for the appellant sought to contend that the marks, which were submitted by the appellant in the online application, were subsequently corrected and that the appellant may be permitted to continue the said course with private study.
5.
Be that as it may, since a counter affidavit has already been filed and the matter is still pending before the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that all issues are to be considered by the learned Single Judge itself. We do not find any good ground to entertain the writ appeal, which was filed against the interim order passed on 9.3.2015, wherein, the learned Single Judge has granted time and is seized of the matter. We thus, dismiss the writ appeal. It shall be open for the appellant to request for early hearing of the writ petition. Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Jvt