[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The first respondent was a student, who participated in the selection processs for the acadamic year 2016-2017. She did cross the qualifying mark. Unfortunately, at the time of making application through online, though she belongs to other Backward Community, she made entry as if she belong to open category. Based upon her qualification, she was accordingly admitted with the third respondent college. Now she completed first year.
2.During the course of her studies, it came to be known that she actually belongs to a Backward Community and therefore, her application filled as open category is not correct. Hence, she filed the writ petition seeking declaration that she should be allowed to continue with her studies as a Backward Community students. The writ petition was duly allowed and hence, the present writ appeal has been filed.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the appellant did not have any other Rule except conducting the examination, there cannot be positive direction to the appellant.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would submit that the earlier similar order passed by the learned single Judge has not been challenged before this Court. As seen from the communication of the second appellant, dated 26.04.2017, coupled with the fact that the first respondent has completed first year and there is no dispute over the studies, no interference is required.
5.Considering the above, we are of the view that the appeal needs to be disposed of clarifying that the first respondent/writ petitioner shall be allowed to continue with her studies as one belong to the OBC category. It is for the reason that once she is entitled to get a seat as a OBC candidate, she cannot be denied as such. It is not as if, she is not otherwise entitled. Her admission has never put under challenge by any other candidate. Now, she is completed the first year. Therefore, this writ appeal stands disposed of by treating the studies of the first respondent / writ petitioner as an OBC category and on that basis, she is allowed to continue and complete her studies.
6. In such view of the matter, no certificate required for first respondent. It is also to be noted by her clarification that the respondent has secured more than OBC cut off. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To
1.B.Nesalin Isha (Minor), Rep. by father and natural guardian Babu Chandra Sekaran.
2.The Controller of Examinations, Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, No.69, Anna Salai Gunindy, Chennai-600 032.
3.The principal, Rajas Dental College and Hospital, Thirurajapuram, Tirunelveli .