JILBIN JOSEPH Vs. VISWESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court seeking that a mandamus be issued to the first respondent to take appropriate measures against the second respondent so that the second respondent returns the original certificates of SSLC + 2 migration and transfer certificates of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner had joined the second respondent -college which is affiliated to the first respondent -University. He had joined the fourth year B.E. Computer Science and Engineering for the academic year 2013 -14. The admission was under the management quota. The petitioner met with an accident on 24.05.2014 when he is stated to have fallen down the stairs and fractured his right leg, right knee and underwent operation. In the said process, he had missed the classes due to which he could not continue the course subsequently. It is in that view, the petitioner had made a representation seeking that the original documents which had been submitted be returned to him so as to avail his other avenues as he would not be in a position to continue the engineering course. Since the second respondent at the first instance had not acceded to the request of the petitioner, the petitioner is stated to have approached the first respondent who had directed the second respondent to return the documents. Since the same has not been done, the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) The second respondent has filed the objection statement opposing the relief sought by the petitioner. The contention is that when a seat under the management quota is secured by the petitioner, if the petitioner abandons the course in the midstream, the second respondent would not be entitled to admit any other student, the seat would remain vacant for the entire duration of the course for which the petitioner had been admitted and as such, it would cause financial loss to the second respondent. Hence, it is contended that unless the petitioner makes good the said loss by paying the amount that had been sought by the second respondent through their communication, the return of the documents cannot be sought by the petitioner.