Niranjana C.A vs State Of Kerala And Ors

This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P13, P15 orders and P22 minutes to the extend it requires the petitioner to continue her studies in the 5th semester MBBS course in the 6th respondent's college. Ext.P17 as well as Ext.P24 order to the extend it cancels the registration of the petitioner for 2nd professional MBBS examination conducted in February, 2020 is also under challenge.

Heard Smt.Girija K.Gopal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the Medical Council of India, Sri.P.Sreekumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the University and Sri.C.S. Ajith Prakash , the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent.

It is submitted that the petitioner had been directed to be admitted in the 5th semester in the 6th respondent's college without considering the specific directions contained in Ext.P11 common judgment of this Court directing the consideration of individual grievances. It is submitted that the petitioner herein was the writ petitioner in W.P.(C).No.3676 of 2020 and W.P.(C).No.11640 of 2020 which were disposed of by Ext.P11. While disposing of the batch of writ petitions, this Court had specifically directed the University to take an appropriate decision with regard to declaration of results and all consequential actions with regard to the students who participated in the examinations in accordance with the interim orders of this Court or otherwise and taking note of the ground realities and the practicalities.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she had been admitted for the 2nd professional MBBS course in the 5th respondent college in March, 2018. After July 2019, there were no classes in the college and that the petitioner was not permitted to attend the examinations of the 2nd professional MBBS conducted in August 2019 on the ground that she did not have the required attendance and had not passed the internal examination. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that though request had been made before the University, the details of the attendance or the marks obtained in the internal examinations had not been made available to the petitioner. Long thereafter, by Ext.P21, the petitioner came to know that she had the required attendance in 3 of the 4 subjects and that the lack of attendance in Pathology was only in the practicals, which the petitioner contends, was specifically an act of victimization at the instance of the 5th respondent for having approached this Court taking specific grounds that the 5th respondent lacked the infrastructure and facilities for conduct of the MBBS course in the college. It is therefore contended that the specific directions contained in Ext.P11 to consider the factual aspects of the matter had not been complied with before Exts.P22 and P24 orders were issued. It is submitted that the petitioner who had the required attendance in all the theory classes and had been victimized in respect of the attendance in the practical classes of Pathology alone for the 2nd professional MBBS would be entitled to admission in the 6th semester if her case had been considered on its merits by the University as directed in Ext.P11

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submits that the entire exercise with regard to reallocation of the students had to be completed in a time bound manner and that the details given by the 5th respondent had been relied on and appropriate action had to be taken without loss of any time. It is further contended that the question with regard to the individual grievance of the petitioner could not be considered in the above circumstances.

Having considered the contentions advanced on all sides, I am of the opinion that since the petitioner has raised a specific plea that she did have the required attendance and eligibility for appearing for examination conducted in 2019 as is evident from Ext.P21 and that she has been victimized by the 5th respondent for having filed the writ petitions before this Court, the issue with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner for publishing the results of the exam conducted in February 2020 and for attending the 6th semester is liable to be considered in accordance with law, taking note of the specific facts in her case.

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the competent authority in the University to consider the request of the petitioner for admission to the 6th semester of the MBBS course in the 6th respondent's college instead of the 5th semester. Necessary shall be done after hearing the petitioner and the 6th respondent, positively within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall be permitted to appear for the 5th semester examination provisionally and subject to the orders to be passed by the University as directed above. The question with regard to the declaration of the results of the examination taken by the petitioner in February 2020 pursuant to an interim order of this Court shall also be considered by the appropriate authority in the University.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.