Kerala High Court
Midhun M.S vs The Principal on 15 April, 2016
Author: Shaji P.Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2016/26TH CHAITHRA, 1938
WP(C).No.15080 of 2016 (H)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
1. MIDHUN M.S.,
AGED:18 YEARS,S/O MADHUSOODHANA PILLAI,
RESIDING AT M.S SONS, KIZHUVILAM VILLAGE,
CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 104.
2. VAISHNAV K,
AGED:19 YEARS, S/O KANAKADAS,
RESIDING AT BINDU NIVAS, NAGAROR VILLAGE,
CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695102.
3. ADARSH A.A,
AGED:18 YEARS, S/O AJITH KUMAR,
RESIDING AT AKKARAMANAGALAM HOUSE,
VADAKKASSERIKONAM PO, VARKALA TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695143.
BY ADVS. SMT.M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)
SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE PRINCIPAL,
GOVT. ITI, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE VICE PRINCIPAL, GOVT. ITI ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.V.JOSEPH
THIS WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-04-2016,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.15080 of 2016(H)
-------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
P1-THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR,
ATTINGAL DT. 7/4/2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-NIL
-----------------------------
KRJ
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P(C) No.15080 of 2016
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 15th day of April, 2016
JUDGMENT
Petitioners are challenging the action of the respondents by suspending them from the College allegedly for involvement of transactions in narcotic drugs or other alcoholic products. It is the contention of the petitioners that they are not involved in any such activities and at the request of the petitioners' parents, Ext.P1 was issued by the Excise Circle Inspector, Attingal confirming that petitioners are not involved in any case registered with the said office. It is the contention of the petitioners that inspite of the production of Ext.P1 before respondents 1 and 2, the petitioners are not permitted to attend classes. It is the apprehension of the petitioners that if they are not permitted to attend classes any further, they will not be able to write the examination for want of requisite attendance.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. In view of the facts situation and the circumstances involved in the case, I am of the considered opinion that petitioner WP(C).15080/16 -:2:- can be directed to file a suitable representation before the first respondent seeking to ventilate their grievances, and if such an application is filed, taking into account Ext.P1 and any other circumstances pointed out by the petitioners, first respondent shall take a decision and consider whether the petitioners can be permitted to attend the classes and write the examination.
4. Needless to say, if the petitioners are innocent in the matter, the question with respect to attendance for non-attending classes consequent to their suspension will also be taken into account by the first respondent sympathetically and in accordance with law. A decision in that regard shall be taken as early as possible, at any rate, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE krj.16/4/16