AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devan Ramachandran, J
The petitioner seeks a direction to the competent Authority of the University of Kerala to adjudge him as the “Best N.S.S Volunteer” and to include him in Ext.P8 list; thus awarding him the same, in the programme which is scheduled on 16.11.2022.
Sri.P.M Girijavallabhan – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client achieved 240 hours of voluntary participation under the National Service Scheme (NSS) from August, 2019 to August, 2021 and hence the certificate to such effect, namely Ext.P6, would entitle to him to be considered for the Award this year, namely 2021-2022, alone. He argued that, however, his client has not been included in the list of candidates eligible to the Award, under a misdirection of the University; and hence prayed that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition be granted.
In response, Sri.Thomas Abraham – the learned Standing Counsel for the University, submitted that a statement has been filed on record, averring that Ext.P6 Certificate would entitle the petitioner to the “NSS Award” only in the year, 2021, and not 2021-2022, since it clearly shows that he participated during the period from 2019-2021. He then added that, on assessment of the petitioner's accomplishments by the competent Authority namely the 4th respondent, except in the area of planting of trees saplings, the others were not found to be remarkable. He thus prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.
I am fully aware that the petitioner has rushed to this Court at the 11th hour, because the Awards are to be given to eligible candidates tomorrow (16.11.2022). However, it is without doubt that if the petitioner is found eligible, he must be offered the Award later, since the grant of the same to the persons mentioned in Ext.P8 would not impede his chances in any manner, if he is individually found to be deserving. This is affirmed by Sri.Thomas Abraham also.
In such perspective, the challenge of the petitioner against some of the persons mentioned in Ext.P8, would be unnecessary to be considered.
As I have already said above, if the petitioner is entitled to the Award, then he should certainly be given the same. However, this is not something that this Court can affirmatively declare, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, since it requires an assessment of all relevant factual and documentary inputs.
I am, therefore, of the opinion that the petitioner's case must be reviewed by the 5th respondent or such other competent Authority of the University; and if he is found to be eligible, then that he be benefited with the Award subsequently.
Resultantly, I order this writ petition with the following directions:
a) I direct the petitioner to mark appearance before the 5th respondent – Co-Ordinator of the National Service Scheme of the University of Kerala at 11 A.M. on 22.11.2022, with all his credentials.
b) On the petitioner marking appearance as afore, the 5th respondent will hear him - either on that day or on a date to be fixed for such purpose - and evaluate his credentials, adverting to his contentions that Ext.P6 Certificate can only obtain to him the benefit for the year 2021-2022 and not for the year 2021, because the period mentioned therein takes it the time frame between August, 2019 to August, 2021. This shall be done by the said respondent not later than two weeks from 22.11.2022.
c) If, through the afore exercise, the 5th respondent is to find that the petitioner is entitled to an Award, he will be favoured with the same, notwithstanding the fact that the persons mentioned in Ext.P8 have already been benefited with it in the programme scheduled on 16.11.2022. In other words, the petitioner will be given the said Award subsequently, subject to all other criteria being satisfied.