STATE OF KERALA Vs. FLEMING SHAIJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ appeal is filed by the State of Kerala and its Higher Secondary Education and General Education Department, aggrieved by an interim order dated 28.10.2021 of a learned Single Judge in WP(C)No.23353 of 2021. In as much as the issue raised in the writ appeal lies in a very narrow compass and we felt that an adjudication of the appeal would effectively dispose the writ petition itself, we deemed it appropriate to call for the writ petition also for consideration along with the appeal. It is thus that both the writ appeal and the writ petition are before us today.

(2.) The writ petition was filed by a minor represented by his mother, who is a student, who passed the Secondary School Examination 2021 from the Central Board of Secondary Education. It is stated that the petitioner submitted an online application for admission to the Higher Secondary course (Plus One) (2021-2022) the allotment for which is undertaken by the Directorate of Higher Secondary Education of the State Government. It was the desire of the petitioner to get admission to the Science Biology seat through the Central allotment process undertaken by the State Government in one of the Government/aided schools in the State for which the allotment process was managed by the State Government. It would appear that the petitioner did not secure admission after completion of two allotments and although the petitioner was entitled to be considered in the subsequent allotment procedures, by way of abundant caution he obtained admission to the Plus One course in an unaided school the allotment to which is not carried out by the State Government, but by the unaided school itself. The grievance in the writ petition was essentially against the stand taken by the second respondent that in view of the admission obtained by the petitioner to the Plus One course in an unaided Higher Secondary school, he could not be considered thereafter for allotment to the Government and aided Higher Secondary schools under the Central allotment procedure carried out by the State Government.

(3.) The learned Single Judge who considered the matter, after going through the prospectus published by the Government on 12.08.2021 as also the various Government Orders relied on by the Government Pleader, found that it was with a view to make the admission to Higher Secondary schools in the State transparent, simple and in compliance with the norms of social justice that the State Government had put in place the Single Window System for admission to Plus One courses. A reference was made to Clause 3 of the prospectus to find that the admission to the management, community and unaided seats was to be done by the respective managements and the students seeking admissions to such seats were also required to approach the school concerned directly for securing admissions to such seats. It was found that the application for Single Window System could not be used for admission to the management/community/unaided quota seats. Relying on the said provisions in the prospectus, the learned Single Judge found that in as much as the petitioner had not secured admission through the allotment as per the Single Window System to a Plus One course in any aided or Government Higher Secondary School, the mere fact that he had secured admission in an unaided school could not work his disadvantage while considering his candidature for admission to the Government/aided Higher Secondary schools through the centralised allotment procedure, and based on his ranking in the merit list. The Government was directed to accept the application preferred by the petitioner for allotment to the Government/ aided Higher Secondary schools and process the same in terms of the various clauses in the prospectus.