SANDHYA M. Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner sought for admission to the post graduate course in M.A. (English language and literature), which however was denied by the concerned respondents, in respect of the academic year 2012 - '13. The college authorities took steps to fill up the available vacancy by conducting spot admission on 08.11.2012. Since the procedure followed by the concerned authorities was not in conformity with the statutory requirement, the petitioner sought to challenge the same by filing W.P.(C) No. 26996 of 2012, to direct the respondents to admit the petitioner in one of the seats for the academic year 2012 - '13. When the matter came up for consideration on 05.12.2012, the 4th respondent institution filed an affidavit/statement pointing out that one seat was vacant and that the University can take a decision whether a candidate can be accommodated in the said vacancy, since admission to the said course had already been closed. The learned standing counsel appearing for the University submitted that the University will take appropriate steps in terms of the allotment roster, if there was no legal impediment. Recording the said submission, the matter was disposed of, as per Ext. P1 judgment, directing the University to finalize the matter accordingly.

(2.) PURSUANT to the above verdict, the matter was considered by the University, who issued Ext. P2 order dated 19.12.2012 expressing sanction accorded by the Vice Chancellor for admitting the petitioner to the M.A. (English) course in the 4th respondent institution for the academic year 2012 - '13, if she is otherwise eligible. Based on the said order, the petitioner remitted the requisite fee as borne by Ext. P3 receipt and she started attending the classes accordingly. The position was duly let known to the University by the 4th respondent as well, vide Ext. P4 dated 20.12.2012.

(3.) THE stand of the University as revealed from the counter affidavit is that, as per the relevant Rules, minimum attendance required for a candidate to appear for examination is 75% and that the maximum extent of condonation of shortage of attendance is 20 days, whereas in the case of the petitioner, the shortage is beyond the said limit. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no fault on the part of the petitioner in attending the classes and that the petitioner has attended all the days eversince the date of admission and as such, the petitioner is entitled to pursue studies and appear in the examinations.