K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

1. The petitioner is the Principal of a Self Financing College. This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P7, an order dated 18.6.2018 passed by the first respondent, the Admission Supervisory Committee for Professional Colleges. As per the impugned order, the first respondent has directed the petitioner herein to return to the third respondent an amount of Rs.2 Lakhs paid by her as fees for the entire course. A further direction has been issued to the second respondent to return to her an amount of Rs.10,000/- within a period of ten days. The order happened to be passed in the following circumstances:

The third respondent was an applicant for admission to the B. Tech course during the year 2014-2015. She had indicated the institutions of her preference in her application submitted to the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations. The second respondent, Commissioner for Entrance Examinations allotted her to the petitioner College. She was allotted to the same College during the first, second and third rounds of allotment and therefore she joined the College and paid the fees payable for the first year. Thereafter, she found that a student having a lower rank was allotted to the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology, Kottayam, an institution that was preferred by the third respondent as her fourth option. Since she was not granted her fourth option while the same was granted to a candidate of a lower rank, the aggrieved third respondent challenged the same before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 20769 of 2014. This Court found her claim to be justified and therefore, an interim order was passed on 14.8.2014 directing her to be admitted to the said College. The said interim order extracted in Ext.P7 reads as follows:

“In view of the fact that there is one seat in 4th respondent college, petitioner shall be admitted to the 4th respondent college for B. Tech in Civil Engineering. It is open for the 3rd respondent to fill the above seat through management quota, if the seats as such are filled, the amount collected from the petitioner shall be refunded to the petitioner. 3rd Respondent is directed to release the certificates to the petitioner in terms of Clause 19 of the Government Order produced as Ext.R3(a) by 3rd respondent.”

Pursuant to the above interim order, the third respondent was admitted to the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology. Thereupon, she requested for return of her certificates for joining the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology. At that time, she was compelled to pay a sum of Rs.94,175/- towards liquidated damages. Later on, she filed a complaint before the first respondent on 10.11.2017 seeking the issue of a direction to the petitioner to refund an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- collected from her along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of remittance and also for a direction to the second respondent to return the amount of Rs.10,000/- to her with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of remittance. She also sought for the recovery of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the hardships and mental agony suffered by her due to the illegal acts of the respondents.

2. The petitioner objected to the complaint pointing out that she had filed W.P.(C) No. 20769 of 2014 before this Court earlier and had also approached the Lok Ayuktha in C.C. No. 428 of 2015 and also the Permanent Lok Adalath. Therefore, it was contended that, the complaint was not maintainable. Since the third respondent had left the College after the cut off date that was stipulated, it was contended that she was liable to pay liquidated damages as per Clause 12.2.4 of the Prospectus. It was also contended that, under the provisions of the Consensual Agreement between the Self Financing Engineering College Management Association and the Government and the Government Order issued on the basis of the said agreement, the College was entitled to collect liquidated damages. It was contended that, the seat