FATHIMA FASHNA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 as well as learned counsel appearing for 4th respondent.

(2.) THIS Writ Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 24.07.2014 in W.P.(C) No. 19154 of 2014 by which the learned Single Judge refused to interfere with the issue with regard to Ext.P6 letter or to grant any of the reliefs sought, except that the 4th respondent was given liberty to consider whether the petitioner may be accommodated in a seat in some other quota, provided she is eligible. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for considering this appeal are as under.

(3.) LEARNED Single Judge noticing the definition of dependent in Exts.P1 and P2 held that brother -in -law is not a relative who does not come under the definition of dependent and the petitioner is not entitled to claim a seat under NRI quota. Against the judgment of learned Single Judge, this Writ Appeal was filed. The Writ Appeal was heard on 31.07.2014 and following order was passed: