THE PRINCIPAL V. THE ADMISSION AND FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE

WP(C)/15337/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Kannur Medical College, which faced legal scrutiny over the admissions it granted in 2016-17, deemed illegal by the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) under the Kerala Professional Colleges Act, 2006. The Supreme Court had earlier directed the college to refund the fees collected from the students, which led to a dispute over the amount refunded to the complainant, Jyothish Kumar. The High Court's decision addressed the discrepancies in the amounts claimed and refunded, leading to a modification of the ASC's order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 692707 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: M.S Kazi v. Muslim Education Society & Others [(2016) 9 SCC 263]
• Laws Referred To: Kerala Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MARY BENJAMIN; P V VENUGOPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GEORGE POONTHOTTAM; NISHA GEORGE
• Keywords: Admission Supervisory Committee; Illegal admission; Kannur Medical College; Refund; Supreme Court Directive
• Section: 4

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 18TH BHADRA, 1942 WP(C).No.15337 OF 2019(N) PETITIONER: THE PRINCIPAL KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE,ANJARAKKANDI, KANNUR,KERALA-670612. BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) SMT.NISHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADMISSION AND FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES IN KERALA, T.C.15/1553-4,PRASANTHI BUILDINGS,M.P.APPAN ROAD,VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN 2 JYOTHISH KUMAR, KANNOLIL HOUSE,CHERUSSERY BHAGAM,CHAVARA.P.O,KOLLAM-691583. R1 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROF. COLLEGES R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.VENUGOPAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25- 08-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).2551/2020(T), THE COURT ON 09-09-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 W.P.(C).No.15337/19 & 2551/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 18TH BHADRA, 1942 WP(C).No.2551 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER: JYOTHISHKUMAR AGED 54 YEARS S/O.VIJAYAN PILLAI RESIDING AT KANNOLIL HOUSE, CHERUSSERIBHAGAM, CHAVARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-601 582 BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.VENUGOPAL SHRI.SENKUMAR T.P. SRI.K.T.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: 1 ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESIONAL COLLEGES IN KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HEAD OFFICE, TC 15/153-4,PRASANTHI BUILDINGS, MP APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHAKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE NO.-695 014 2 KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, ANJARAKKANDI, KANNUR, KERALA, PIN CODE NO-670 612 3 PRINCIPAL, KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, ANJARAKKANDI, KANNUR, PINCODE NO.-670 612 3 W.P.(C).No.15337/19 & 2551/2020 4 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE NO.685 001 SRI. M.A. ASIF-SR.G.P FOR R4 SMT.NISHA GEORGE FOR R2 AND R3 R1 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROF. COLLEGES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25- 08-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).15337/2019(N), THE COURT ON 09-09-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:4:- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 9th day of September, 2020 Shaffique, J. The admissions granted by the Kannur Medical College to the MBBS Course in that college in the year 2016-17 were found to be illegal and contrary to law by the Admission Supervisory Committee (hereinafter also referred to as the 'ASC') constituted in terms of Section 4 of the Kerala Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006 Act, [Act 19 of 2006] (now repealed) through an order dated 14.11.2016. The Supreme Court refused to interfere with this order and it became final. As a consequence, the admissions granted to nearly 150 students had to be cancelled. Though the State promulgated an ordinance to regularize the admission, the said ordinance was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:5:- 2. On 25.07.2018, there was a recommendation by the ASC to the Kerala University of Health Sciences, to withdraw the affiliation/recognition of Kannur Medical College for the academic year 2018-2019. These proceedings were found to be in order by a Division Bench of this Court through a judgment dated 1.8.2018 in W.P . (C) No.25895 of 2018. The matter was carried to the Supreme Court of India through S.L.P (C) No. 23225 of 2018 and connected cases. A consent order was passed on 29.08.2018 in S.L.P (C) No. 23225 of 2018 and connected cases which order is on record in this case. We are concerned here only with the 1st direction that forms part of the consent order dated 29.08.2018 which, provides that the college shall return an amount equivalent to the double of the amount collected from the students together with refund of the fee deposited by each one of the 150 students, with the college, by 04-09-2018. There was a further direction that the ASC shall ascertain and report as to whether the amounts in question have been refunded, as directed. On 1.9.2018, the ASC filed its report which inter alia suggested that the amounts directed to be paid/refunded to each of the students have not been paid/refunded in terms of the WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:6:- directions issued by the Supreme Court. Therefore, a further direction was issued by the Supreme Court on 4.10.2018 through which it was directed that the ASC shall determine the amount payable to each one of the students. The ASC has passed individual orders in respect of claims raised before it by the students/ guardians. In WP(C) No.15337/2019, we are concerned with an order passed by the ASC in terms of the direction issued by the Supreme Court, determining the amount payable by the petitioner college on account of the fees and other amounts collected from the student. 3. The question of maintainability of WP(C) No. 15337/2019 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India having been questioned at the admission stage, a Division Bench of this Court, to which one amongst us (myself) was a party, came to the conclusion through an order dated 20.2.2020 that the Writ Petition was maintainable. Therefore, we do not propose to go into that issue again. 4. Before we proceed to determine the correctness or otherwise of the impugned order, we must notice the observation of the Supreme Court in the order dated 4.10.2018 WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:7:- that the quantum of amount collected by the College from each student and what amount has been refunded is a seriously disputed fact and also notice the following direction issued to the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) by the Supreme Court. “The ASC to consider the material which may be placed on record by the respective parties and take a decision in accordance with law on the basis of the evidence adduced in each of the case with respect to each of the students. (emphasis is ours) Thus it is clear that the direction given to the ASC was to individually determine the case of each student, in accordance with law, having due regard to the material which may be placed on record and the evidence adduced by the parties. Since the entire exercise undertaken by the ASC was in terms of the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court, it goes without saying that the ASC was bound to conclude its determination strictly in terms of the direction issued by the Supreme Court. 5. We heard the counsel appearing for all the parties. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 15337/2019 would contend that the ASC had determined the issue based on mere surmises and conjectures and that there WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:8:- was no reliable material before the Committee to hold that the amount in question was payable to the complainant/student. He states that the college has not received any amount other than the admitted amount of `11.65 lakhs and therefore no further liability could be fastened on the college since an amount of `15.30 lakhs has already been refunded. The learned Counsel appearing for the ASC would point out that the ASC which was a Committee under Act 19 of 2006 has not been impleaded in this writ petition and this, according to her, is a fatal defect. She states that the first respondent herein is the body constituted under the enactment which repealed and replaced Act 19 of 2006, namely Act 15 of 2017. On merits, she would contend that the College had indulged in severe malpractices resulting in the orders against them which have already been noticed above. She would urge that we must not interfere with the orders which have been issued by the ASC after careful scrutiny of all materials placed before it. The learned counsel for the student/complainant would support the findings in the order and urge that we should not interfere with the order. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:9:- 7. We must first consider the question as to whether the non-impleadment of the ASC in WP(C) No.15337/2019 should be a ground to refuse consideration of the matter on its merits. We are of the considered opinion that the ASC is not a necessary party to these proceedings since the Committee is not required to justify its findings before this Court in any manner. We are fortified in taking such a view in the light of the law laid down by a 3 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in M.S Kazi v. Muslim Education Society & Others [(2016) 9 SCC 263]. 8. The ASC has, by order dated 19/3/2019 determined the amount payable to student/complainant to be a sum of `62,45,000/- after deducting the amount of `15,30,000/- already paid by the college. We have gone through the order impugned before us and perused the material produced before the ASC in order to determine whether the order passed by the ASC was sustainable and in accordance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court. 9. In terms of the Supreme Court order, the college was required to refund the fees and double the amount collected over WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:10:- and above the fees. Therefore, the Committee determined the amount to be refunded in the following manner:- Sl. No. Particulars Amount 1 Fee including hostel fee `11,65,000/- 2 T wice the amount collected over and above the fee (`33,05,000 x 2) `66,10,000/- 3 Amount already refunded `15,30,000/- 4 Balance payable (1 + 2 - 3) `62,45,000/- 10. The impugned order was passed by the Admission Supervisory Committee on 19.3.2019 (Ext.P13) by which the petitioner/College was directed to pay an amount of `62,45,000/- (Rupees Sixty two lakhs forty five thousand only) to the complainant. According to the complainant, at the time of admission, `44,70,000/- (Rupees forty four lakhs seventy thousand only) was paid to the Management. This fact is disputed by the petitioner/College and according to them, they had received only `11.65 lakhs towards tuition fee and hostel fee. 11. In order to prove the claim, the student’s father was examined as CW1 and he placed reliance on Annexures C1 to C6 documents. Documents were produced to prove the source of funds. The Committee placed reliance on the said documents WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:11:- and came to a finding that there is no reason to disbelieve CW1 and accordingly passed the aforesaid order. 12. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the evidence adduced by the complainant could not have been relied upon to prove the source of funds for payment of such a huge amount. It is submitted that the Committee relied upon Annexures C3 to C6 to arrive at a finding that the complainant had the source of funds. It is pointed out that Annexure C3 is only an income tax return with reference to the assessment year 2018-19 and it does not reflect the income and expenditure during the year 2016. The said document is produced as Ext.P9 and during the assessment year 2018-19, the gross total income is shown as only `4,87,604/- which may not help the complainant in any manner. Annexure C4 (Ext.P10) is a statement regarding closure of deposit in the name of Smt.Leelamani Amma R., on 24.9.2016. Smt.Leelamani Amma R., is the grandmother of the student. Probably there is justification on placing reliance on the aforesaid documents as it is possible that grandmother may lend money for the admission of her granddaughter. Annexure C4 series relates to withdrawal WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:12:- of `9 lakhs. Annexure C5 (Ext.P11) is a certificate issued by the Karunagappally Co-operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Ltd on 21.11.2016. It is stated that a total amount of `15 lakhs was given as loan during the year 2016-17. There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the aforesaid document. Annexure C6 which was produced along with additional proof affidavit relates to withdrawal of funds from a Trust. It is stated that `7 lakhs was withdrawn on 21.10.2016 and `15.50 lakhs was withdrawn on 24.10/25.10.2016. Learned counsel submits that there was no reason for payment of any amount after the admissions were cancelled as uploaded in University website on 28.9.2016. It is brought to our notice that in a complaint filed as Ext.P3 before the Police, it was stated that complainant had paid only `30 lakhs and five post-dated cheques of Rs.8 lakhs each were given. Further, `5 lakhs was entrusted to Hashim and `1,70,000/- was paid towards hostel fee. That apart, `8 lakhs was paid during the 2nd week of December. It is argued that when such a complaint was given and on the basis of which FIR had been lodged, the evidence before the committee was self- contradictory. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:13:- 13. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the complainant would submit that there is justification on the part of the Committee to have directed refund of the aforesaid amount as it is submitted that `9 lakhs was given by the grandmother. Complainant had taken only `15 lakhs as loan. Thereafter, `20.5 lakhs was taken from the Holy Trinity Anglo Indian International School where he is a trustee and the balance money was available with him. It is therefore argued that, when there is sufficient proof to indicate the source of funds, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Further, learned counsel submits that the copy of the FIR produced as Ext.P14 cannot be utilised for any purpose other than during a criminal trial for the purpose of contradiction. 14. In the present lis, we are only concerned with the question whether the Committee was justified in placing reliance upon the documents which proves source of funds. As far as Annexure C4 series and Annexure C5 are concerned, there cannot be any dispute. Of course, in Annexures C5 the date on which the amounts have been taken has not been specifically stated. But still, when there is source of funds, we are inclined to accept WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:14:- the same. As far as Annexure C6 is concerned, it is an account maintained by Holy Trinity Trust. According to the complainant, he is a trustee and he had taken money from the said account. From the account, it is seen that the money had been taken only in October, 2016. On 21.10.2016, `7 lakhs was withdrawn as cash, on 24.10.2016, `5 lakhs was withdrawn as cash and on 25.10.2016, `10.50 lakhs was withdrawn as cash. Altogether, `22 lakhs was withdrawn from the said account as cash. In the complaint filed by the complainant before police, on the basis of which FIR had been registered, it is stated that initially he paid `30 lakhs and 5 cheques for `8 lakhs was given. On the day when the class started, `5 lakhs was given along with `1.70 lakhs towards hostel fee. During December, `8 lakhs was given. Therefore, according to him, `30 lakhs was given initially, `6.70 lakhs on the date of admission and subsequently in December `8 lakhs was given. So the total amount paid was `44.70 lakhs.. 15. One contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner has to be addressed. When the admissions were cancelled as early as in September, 2016, what was the necessity to give further amount of `8 lakhs. There is no valid explanation WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:15:- for the same. Learned counsel submits that the student had continued her studies and was attending classes. Even after the judgment of the Apex Court, she continued as an inmate and a hostler and was paying the fee. 16. In W.P .(C).No.2551/2020 filed by the complainant seeking to implement the order passed by the Committee, additional documents were produced as Ext.P9 series. Reference is also made to Ext.P10, loan ledger extract maintained with the Primary Agricultural Development Bank, Karunagapally to indicate that he had created equitable mortgage and received a loan of `15 lakhs on 15.12.2016. In the proof affidavit filed before the Committee, the complainant had shown the source of having received `9 lakhs from his mother, `15 lakhs from Karunagapally Agricultural and Rural Development Bank and `20.50 lakhs from the Trust fund. As rightly pointed out by the counsel for petitioner college, the Trust fund is withdrawn only in October, 2016, i.e., on 21.10.2016, 24.10.2016 and 25.10.2016. These payments cannot be treated as source of funds for payment to the college, as the admissions were over on 1.10.2016. Even according to the complainant, in the FIS given by him to the WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:16:- Police, his case was totally different. After 1.10.2016, according to him, he had paid only `8 lakhs, whereas, he had paid `36.70 lakhs on or before 1.10.2016. However, in the complaint to the police he has stated that a further amount of `8 lakhs was paid in December. From the materials placed on record, as on 1.10.2016, the complainant was able to prove the source of funds of only `9 lakhs covered by Annexure C4 series and `15 lakhs covered by Annexure C5. The total amount thus available with him was `24 lakhs. T aking into account the fact that he is a person who is capable of raising funds, it is possible that he had paid a total amount of `30 lakhs as alleged by him and the rest he would have given by way of cheques. 17. Hence, we are of the view that the Committee erred in arriving at a conclusion that the complainant had paid the entire amount as claimed by him. The source of funds as on the last date of admission does not justify the said payment. In the proof affidavit, the complainant does not have a case that he had paid any amount after 1.10.2016. 18. The amounts thus payable/refundable by the college is redetermined as under:- WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:17:- Sl. No. Particulars Amount 1 Fees including hostel fee `11,65,000/- 2 Double the amount collected over and above the fee (`18,35,000 x 2) `36,70,000/- 3 T otal amount payable in terms of the direction of the Supreme Court `48,35,000/- 4 Amount already paid `15,30,000/- 5 Balance amount payable `33,05,000/- Exhibit P13 order in WP(C) No. 15337/2019 shall stand modified accordingly. 19. WP(C) No. 2551/2020 has been filed by the student seeking for implementing order dated 19/3/2019. Since we have already modified the said order and reduced the amount payable, and have issued directions to pay the amount, no further orders are required in the above writ petition. In the result:- (i) WP(C) No. 15337/2019 is partly allowed as under:- The college shall refund an amount of `33,05,000/- (Rupees Thirty three lakhs and five thousand only) to the 2nd respondent within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing which, further steps shall be taken by the 1st WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 -:18:- respondent in accordance with law. (ii) WP(C) No. 2551/2020 is disposed of in the light of the direction issued in WP(C) No.15337/2019. Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Sd/- GOPINATH P. kp True copy P.A To Judge JUDGE WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 19 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15337/2019 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLA(C)NO.23225/2018 DATED 29.08.2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN M.A.NO.2354 OF 29018 IN SLA(C)NO.23225/2018 DATED 04.10.2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE POLICE AS CRIME NO.314 OF 2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 13.06.2018. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN VERSION/OBJECTION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF REPLY FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT WITH ANNEXURES-C1 TO C6 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN VERTIFICATION FORM 2018-19 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT/WITHDRAWAL MADE FROM CHAVARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 31.11.2015 ISSUED BY KARUNAGAPALLY CO- OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE LOAN AVAILED DURING 2016-2017. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 20 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF FEDERAL BANK. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ASC(P)54/18/HO/TVPM/MBBS/KMC DATED 19.03/2019 PASSED BY THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT AND FIRST INFORMATION REPORT REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.0314/2018 BY THE CHAKKARAKKAL POLICE STATION DATED 31.05.2018. EXHIBIT P15 TRHE COPY OF THE CHEQUE NO.188218 EXECUTED AND ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 21 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2551/2020 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE ORDER IN ASC(P) 54/18 HO/TVPM/MBBS/KMC DATED 19.03.2019 EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF PROOF OF AFFIDAVIT FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE ASC DATED 23.01.2019 EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF FD RECEIPT AT CHAVARA CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD-Q147 IN FAVOUR OF LEELA MANI AMMA EXHIBIT P4 A COPY CERTIFICATE DATED 2.11.2016 ISSUED BY KARUNAGAPPALLY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD-Q467 ISSUED TO PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5 A COPY OF A/C STATEMENT OF HOLY TRINTY TRUST THEVALAKARA FROM 19.01.2016- 31.12.2016 AT FEDERAL BANK EXHIBIT P6 A COPY OF CERTIFICATE WITH PHOTOGRAPH OF PETITIONER BEARING SL. NO.2 ISSUED BY SECRETARY OF HOLY TRINITY TRUST DATED 19/12/2010. EXHIBIT P7 A COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY SECRETARY HOLY TRINITY TRUST DATED 06/02/2020 INDICATING ISSUANCE OF 20.5 LAKH FOR PERSONAL NEED OF PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF HOSTEL ADMIT CARD PERTAINING TO APARNA JYOTHISH INDICATING THE FACT HAD PAID ENTIRE HOSTEL FEE UP TO 31/07/2017. EXHIBIT P9(A) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR OCTOBER 2016 DATED 01/10/2016. EXHIBIT P9(B) A COPY OF RECEIPTS INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR NOVEMBER 2016 DATED 03/11/2016. EXHIBIT P9(C) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR MONTH OF DECEMBER 2016 DATED 08/01/2017. WP(C) Nos.15337/19 & 2551/2020 22 EXHIBIT P9(D) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR MONTH OF JANUARY 2017 DATED 21/01/2017. EXHIBIT P9(E) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2017, DATED 19/02/2017. EXHIBIT P9(F) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR MONTH OF MARCH 2017 DATED 28/02/2017. EXHIBIT P9(G) A COPY OF RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT OF MESS FEES FOR MONTH OF APRIL 2017 DATED 02/05/2017. EXHIBIT P10 A COPY OF LOAN LEDGER EXACT ISSUED BY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, KARUNAGAPPALLY BRANCH INDICATING LOANS AVAILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P11 A COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT/BRANCH HEAD OF FEDERAL BANK ISSUED THROUGH KARUNAGAPPALLY BRANCH DATED 10/07/2020 SO AS TO PRODUCE BEFORE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. "