Kerala High Court | Income of Abandoning Parent Irrelevant for EWS Certificate | Relief Granted to Meritorious Student for NIFT Admission
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Kerala Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh, on 10 September 2025, held that where either parent has abandoned the family, the income of such parent need not be taken into account for granting an Economically Weaker Section (EWS) certificate to the child. Allowing a writ petition filed by a meritorious student who had qualified in the National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT) entrance examination, the Court set aside the revenue authority’s refusal to issue the certificate. The case centered on the applicability of parental income and landholding limits under Government Orders regulating eligibility for reservation benefits.
The writ petition was filed by a student and her mother. The first petitioner appeared for the NIFT Entrance Examination conducted by the National Testing Agency and secured an All India Rank of 1238 and EWS Category Rank of 54. The petitioners sought the benefit of reservation under the EWS category.
The petitioners stated that the father of the first petitioner had left the family twelve years earlier and was residing abroad with another family, without providing support. The second petitioner, mother of the first petitioner, had no independent income.
The petitioners applied for an EWS certificate before the second and third respondents. By communication dated 30 June 2025, the third respondent rejected the application. The rejection was on the ground that the mother held 6.95 cents of land as against the permissible limit of 4.13 cents as per the orders of the Central Government. Another ground cited was that in the Secondary School Certificate of the first petitioner, the mother’s name was shown as Sushadevi instead of Sreeja.
The petitioners submitted documents including an income certificate issued by the Revenue authorities showing the annual income of the family to be below ₹60,000, a certificate from the President of the Grama Panchayat stating that the second petitioner had been abandoned by her husband and had not remarried, and a certificate from the Village Officer confirming that the second petitioner was the mother of the first petitioner. They also produced a location plan showing that 3.5 cents of the land was residential and 3.5 cents agricultural, and a Government Order clarifying the categorisation of such land for EWS eligibility.
Aggrieved by the rejection, the petitioners approached the High Court.
Justice N. Nagaresh observed: “The income of the father as well as mother has to be considered for grant of EWS Certificate. If either of the parents have abandoned the family, the income of such a person need not be taken into account.”
The Court noted: “It is not in dispute that the 1st petitioner's mother, who is the 2nd petitioner, has no independent income. It is also not disputed that the 1st petitioner's father left the family 12 years ago.”
On landholding, the Court recorded: “Ext.P13 Location Plan prepared by the licensed building supervisor under the Department of Urban Affairs, Government of Kerala would show that the 2nd petitioner has only 3.5 Cents of residential area and the remaining 3.5 Cents is agricultural land. The Government of Kerala has issued Ext.P14 Government Order, where it has been categorically stated that for considering the criteria for inclusion in the EWS Category… all the remaining land is to be considered as agricultural land for the purpose of EWS Category. Therefore, the claim of the petitioners cannot be rejected on that ground.”
On the name discrepancy, the Court recorded: “The Village Officer has issued a Certificate stating that the 2nd petitioner is the mother of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner’s mother’s name is Sreeja and according to the petitioners, Sushadevi is the name of her stepmother. Denying the benefit of EWS to the 1st petitioner on the basis of the stepmother’s name appearing in the Secondary School Certificate is also unsustainable.”
The Court further stated: “In such circumstances, Ext.P8 has to be relied on and the 1st petitioner should be granted the benefit of EWS without taking into consideration the income of the father, who has abandoned the petitioners.”
The Court held: “In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and Ext.P12 is set aside. The 3rd respondent is directed to issue EWS Certificate to the 1st petitioner forthwith.”
“The additional 5th respondent shall grant admission to the 1st petitioner if the seat / vacancy is available and if the 1st petitioner satisfies all other necessary parameters.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Sri. Akhil Raj B., Sri. Sravan M.S., Sri. U. Umesh Kumar, Sri. Arun Raj, Sri. Vishnu Vijayan, Smt. Ameesha George
For the Respondents: Smt. O.M. Shalina, Deputy Solicitor General of India; Smt. K. Amminikutty, Senior Government Pleader; Sri. S. Nirmal, Standing Counsel
Case Title: Meghna Devi & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:66634
Case Number: WP(C) No. 24429 of 2025
Bench: Justice N. Nagaresh
