Kasthuri Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Technical Education,

Kasthuri vs 1.The Commissioner of Technical Education,

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 26, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/964570

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/964570
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: D.Hariparanthaman
Decided On: Apr 26, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kasthuri

Respondent

1.The Commissioner of Technical Education,

Excerpt

.....community. aicte prescribed 40% marks as minimum marks for admission in engineering course. but, the petitioner was admitted in the engineering course during the year 2012-13. however, her admission was not approved by the first respondent in the order dated 05.10.2012. the same is challenged in this writ petition.2. the issue was considered by this first bench of this court in w.a.no.1794 of 2012, dated 17.04.2013. paragraph 37 of the order is relevant for the purpose of this case. the same is extracted hereunder:- "before parting, we may mention here that vide order dated 22nd august, 2012 passed in the present writ appeal and writ petition, this court directed the parties to the writ appeal and writ petition to maintain status quo. interim order was also operating during the pendency of the writ petition before the learned single judge. students belonging to sc/sc(a)/st candidates, who have obtained 35% marks, but less than 40% marks, in the 10+2 examinations, got admission in the engineering colleges in the state of tamil nadu and at present they are pursuing their studies. hence, all such admissions made during the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 in respect of sc/sc(a)/st candidates shall not be disturbed, and they shall be allowed to pursue their course as per the statutory provisions applicable in the respective engineering colleges." 3. in view of the above, the impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed. the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to continue the course. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. jikr to 1.the commissioner of technical education, chennai-600 025. 2.the principal, 3846, mother terasa college of engineering and technology, mettusalai, illuppur-622 102, pudukkottai district.

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:

26. 04/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.(MD).No.14808 of 2012 and M.P.(MD).Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 Kasthuri .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Technical Education, Chennai-600 025. 2.The Principal, 3846, Mother Terasa College of Engineering and Technology, Mettusalai, Illuppur-622 102, Pudukkottai District. .. Respondents Prayer Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent in his proceedings letter nO.41342/J2/2012 dated 05.10.2012 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner's son by name K.Anandh to attend classes in the 1st year B.E., Mechnical Engineering Course in the college of the 2nd respondent. !For Petitioner ...Mr.T.M.Madasamy ^For Respondents ...Mrs.S.Bharathi for R1 Government Advocate Mr.R.P.Ramachandran for R2 :ORDER The petitioner obtained 38% in the +2 examinations. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste Community. AICTE prescribed 40% marks as minimum marks for admission in engineering course. But, the petitioner was admitted in the engineering course during the year 2012-13. However, her admission was not approved by the first respondent in the order dated 05.10.2012. The same is challenged in this writ petition.

2. The issue was considered by this First Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1794 of 2012, dated 17.04.2013. Paragraph 37 of the order is relevant for the purpose of this case. The same is extracted hereunder:- "Before parting, we may mention here that vide order dated 22nd August, 2012 passed in the present writ appeal and writ petition, this Court directed the parties to the writ appeal and writ petition to maintain status quo. Interim order was also operating during the pendency of the writ petition before the learned single Judge. Students belonging to SC/SC(A)/ST candidates, who have obtained 35% marks, but less than 40% marks, in the 10+2 examinations, got admission in the Engineering Colleges in the State of Tamil Nadu and at present they are pursuing their studies. Hence, all such admissions made during the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 in respect of SC/SC(A)/ST candidates shall not be disturbed, and they shall be allowed to pursue their course as per the statutory provisions applicable in the respective Engineering Colleges." 3. In view of the above, the impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to continue the course. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. jikr To 1.The Commissioner of Technical Education, Chennai-600 025. 2.The Principal, 3846, Mother Terasa College of Engineering and Technology, Mettusalai, Illuppur-622 102, Pudukkottai District.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2013 Same Parties Kasthuri vs 1.The Commissioner of Technical Education, Same Subject Education Same Judge D.Hariparanthaman