CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Dr. Smruthi C. Raj vs State Of Karnataka & Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 16 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KAR CK 0024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Aradhe, J · S. Vishwajith Shetty, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 5571 Of 2022 (EDN-MED-ADM)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 335 words

S. Vishwajith Shetty, J

1.

In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to expeditiously decide the representation dated 09.02.022 submitted by the petitioner.

2.

Facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner is a Doctor who is posted as Assistant Professor since the year 2016, in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shimoga Institute of Medical Sciences, a Government Hospital. The petitioner participated in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test- Super Specialty examination, which was held on 10.01.2022. The petitioner along with the other Government Doctors submitted a representation on 09.02.2022 to respondents No.1 and 2 requesting them to make a provision for reservation for any in-services candidates in Super Specialty DM/ M.Ch through NEET- Super Specialty 2021. However, the aforesaid representation has not been considered. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition has been filed.

3.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that date of counseling is likely to be announced shortly. Therefore, a time bound direction be given to respondent No.1 to decide the representation, which has been submitted by the petitioner. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate has submitted that the representation has been submitted on 09.02.2022 only and the respondents be granted six months time to decide the same.

4.

We have considered the submissions made on both sides. Taking into account the fact that the date of counseling may be announced shortly. Therefore, in the facts of the case, we direct respondent No.1 to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 09.02.022 within a period of two weeks from today. The petitioner shall be at liberty to place such other material before the respondent No.1 to take a decision in accordance with law. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion with regard to claim of the petitioner and it is open for respondent No.1 to take a decision in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.