ANISH ALEXANDER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. With consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. Since the facts of both the above cases are identical and the issue that arises for consideration is also the same, the writ petitions are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) THE respective petitioners had passed their Higher Secondary Course at Kerala in March 2007 and both of them had secured an overall percentage of 59.33 marks in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. THE writ petitioner Mr.Anish Alexander was admitted in the 4th respondent college on 30.05.2007, while the other writ petitioner Mr.Subin Varghese was admitted in the 4th respondent college on 13.06.2007, under Open Category in Management quota in the first year B.E. course. THEy have paid the requisite Admission fee, Tuition fee, etc., and were regularly continuing their studies. While so, the 4th respondent served a copy of the proceeding of the second respondent in Lr.No.48835/J1/2007, dated 10.12.2007 on the petitioners, wherein it was mentioned that the marks obtained by the petitioners in the Higher Secondary Course are insufficient and they are not eligible for admission as per the new norms. THE proceedings of the second respondent dated 10.12.2007 was based on the proceedings of the 3rd respondent issued in Lr.No.45/FA3/2007, dated 12.07.2007 and hence the petitioners are seeking to quash both the above said proceedings and seeks a further direction to direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue and complete their studies in the B.E. course in the 4th respondent college.

(3.) THE second respondent has also filed a common counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, the second respondent has referred to the minimum eligibility marks prescribed for the academic years 2005 to 2007 and 2007-2008 (since the details of which have been stated in the common counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, which has already been extracted above, the same is not repeated). It is further stated in para 10 & 11 of the counter affidavit as follows: