Rajasekar Reddy Y. vs Government of Karnataka and Others

Anand Byrareddy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner''s daughter Miss Deekshitha Reddy, is said to have been admitted to a medical course through the Karnataka CET in the academic year 2012-13 and has successfully passed the I Year MBBS examination with a first class. The petitioner''s daughter has been suffering from a condition known as haemophilia, which is a disorder that requires special treatment, which, according to the petitioner, is available at Bangalore. On the announcement of the results of the I Year MBBS course by the third respondent on 17/9/2013, and the petitioner having learnt about student strength of the I Year MBBS course in the respondent No. 4 - medical college at Bangalore and the student strength of I Year MBBS in the respondent No. 5 - college, had applied seeking a no objection certificate and for the transfer of his daughter from the respondent No. 2 - college at Bidar, to respondent No. 4 - college at Bangalore, with the hope that she could be accommodated in one of those institutions. It was followed up by further representations, but however, the same has not been considered. One of the reasons put forward was that, the Institution in which the petitioner''s daughter is presently studying, is not recognized by the Medical Council of India (MCI, for brevity) and it is the further grievance of the petitioner that the respondents, without considering the seniority of the application of the petitioner''s daughter for migration, and without reference to her special condition, has effected the transfer of other candidates. It is in this background that the petitioner has approached this court seeking appropriate directions for a consideration of the case of his daughter.

The respondents have entered appearance and sought to contest the matter, though none have filed statement of objections.

However, the matter coming on for preliminary hearing in the ''B'' group, the counsel appearing for the several respondents have been heard at length. It now transpires that insofar as the aspect, whether the institution in which the petitioner''s daughter is presently studying at Bidar, is, or is not, a recognized institution, is no longer relevant, for it is on record that the institution has been granted recognition as recently as on 31/10/2013.

The next aspect whether the candidate''s application for migration, can be considered, is faced with another aspect namely, that there is only one Government college at Bangalore, which can accommodate her, namely, respondent No. 4. The percentage of migration students who can be accommodated in any given year, is restricted to 5% and having regard to the total number of seats, that quota stands exhausted and therefore the question of accommodating the petitioner''s daughter, has been ruled out. It is this aspect, which the learned Government Advocate would bring to the attention of the court.

But, having regard to the fact that the transfer is within the State from one college to another, in respect of which the State Government or the Directorate of Medical Education, Government of Karnataka, are indeed competent to consider, the fact that the MCI regulations, prescribing a quota in respect of migration students, the Directorate of Medical Education, can take further action only if the MCI would permit the same, as the MCI regulations restricts such quota to 5%.

By a letter dated 28/10/2013 to the MCI, the Directorate of Medical Education had sought clarification from the MCI as to whether migration or transfer of students from institutions, yet to be recognized by MCI, could be considered for migration or transfer. If that was the only reason for the Directorate of Medical Education to have, any misgivings of whether or not candidates such as the petitioner''s daughter could not be accommodated, that having been taken away by virtue of the recognition having been extended to her present institution, there is no impediment for the Directorate of Medical Education to accommodate the petitioner''s daughter.

However, by way of abundant caution so that the petitioner''s daughter would not be faced with a situation where her admission to the II Year should be annulled on account of the MCI not having endorsed such migration and admission, it is appropriate that the Directorate of Medical Education shall specifically address the MCI and seek permission insofar as the permission for transfer of the petitioner''s daughter to Bangalore forthwith. The candidate though shall be accommodated, awaiting the permission of the MCI.

The Directorate of Medical Education, therefore is directed to permit the transfer of the petitioner''s daughter to the government college at Bangalore and shall simultaneously write to the MCI regarding the above circumstance and also obtain sanction of such transfer in due course. Immediately on receipt of such a request from the Directorate of Medical Education, the MCI shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders.

In the opinion of this court, this is a fit case where the MCI should, without any hesitation, permit such transfer, having regard to the circumstances of the case and particularly as the intake of the concerned institution for the II Year, is not in any way affected by such a measure. Hence the Directorate of Medical Education is directed to address the MCI forthwith and the MCI, on receipt of such a letter, shall expeditiously extend its approval to such a measure. Therefore this court records the fact that the respondents have been directed to ensure that though the Regulations prescribe a percentage of intake of migration students, the special circumstances under which the petitioner''s daughter shall be accommodated, is taken note of particularly that the intake of the college is not in any way affected by virtue of such accommodation and therefore the respondent No. 6 - Directorate of Medical Education, writing to the MCI, is a mere formality to ensure for the record that this accommodation of the petitioner''s daughter, is provided being conscious of the Regulations. In the event that the MCI does not respond or does not indicate its approval of the measure within one week of receipt of the letter from the Directorate of Medical Education, it shall be deemed that such permission has been granted and the petitioner''s daughter''s transfer shall not be questioned by the respondents.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.