Karnataka High Court
Cauvery Institute Vocational Training vs The Karnataka State Nursing Council on 31 May, 2013
Author: Mohan .M.Shantanagoudar
Bench: Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION Nos.38053 - 38054 OF 2011 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. CAUVERY INSTITUTE OF VOCATIONAL TRAINING
MRF COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR
HARISCHANDRAPURA
GONIKOPPA
VIRAJPET TALUQ
KODAGU DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
SMT.PRAMILA
W/O. SRI.CHINNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
2. VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF HEALTH CARE
ASSISTANCE
BYEPASS ROAD
VIRAJPET
KODAGU DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
SRI. PRATHAP CHINNAPPA P.K.
S/O. LATE KALAIAH
AGED 47 YEARS
K.BOIKERI POST, VIRAJPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT
(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS
"SRI VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF NURSING
AND TECHNOLOGY,
APPAIAH SWAMY ROAD
VIRAJPET - 571 218
KODAGU DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE.)
2
AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA STATE NURSING COUNCIL
NO.71, GANDHINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 001
2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
VIRAJPET POLICE STATION
VIRAJPET,
DISTRICT: KODAGU
3. BHARAT SEVAK SAMAJ
CENTRAL PROGRAMME OFFICE
SATBHAVANA BHAVAN
KOWDIAR P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR
BHARAT SEVAK SAMAJ
NO.14, K.G.H.C. CAMPUS
KACHARAKANAHALLI
(BEHIND PETORL BUNK)
BANGALORE - 84 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.S.SHIVARUDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.JAGADISH MUNDARGI, GA FOR R2;
SRI.SURAT CHANDRA BIJAI, ADVOCATE AND T.K.MOHAN
DAS, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS AND DECLARE THAT
THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA MURSES, MIDWIVES &
HEALTH VISITORS ACT 1961 ARE NOT APPLICABLLE &
UNENFORCEALBE TO THE PETITIONERS INSTITUTIONS & R5
& R6 AND ETC.,
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
The petitioners have sought for following reliefs:-
i) To declare that the provisions of Karnataka Nurses, Midwives and Health Visitors Act, 1961 are not applicable and unenforceable to the Petitioners Institutions and Respondents 5 and 6.ii) To restrain the Respondents No.1 and 2
from interfering with the functioning of the Petitioner Institutions from conducting the Courses recognized by Respondent No.3 by invoking provisions of Karnataka Nurses and Midwives Act 1961 and by enforcing the order of this Hon'ble Court made in W.P.No.18036/2009 (EDN-RES) dated 3.12.2009 as per Annexure-H as against the Petitioners, in the interest of justice.
And in the Alternative
iii) To recall and review the order of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.18036/2009 dated 3.12.2009, as per Annexure-H if necessary and to rehear the matter afresh after providing reasonable 4 opportunity to the Petitioners herein and others similarly placed and the order if any to be passed in the said Writ Petition, in the interest of justice.
iv) To issue any other incidental and consequential reliefs as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case and in aid of the main relief sought for, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The petitioners are the training Institutions imparting Courses called as 'Health Care Assistant' and 'First Aid Course' since 2006-2007. They are conducting such Courses under Bharat Sevak Samaj, which helps petitioners-institutions to impart aforementioned Courses.
In other words, petitioners-Institutions are imparting vocational training Course in the aforementioned subjects as permitted by Bharat Sevak Samaj. The prayer of the petitioners is that they should be allowed to continue to impart said Courses inasmuch as the Bharat Sevak Samaj is a Central Government program and that the provisions 5 of Karnataka Nurses, Midwives and Health Visitors Act, 1961 are not applicable to the petitioners-Institutions.
3. The questions involved in these writ petitions are already answered by this Court in W.P.No.18036/2009 disposed of on 03.12.2009. I do not find any ground to review the said order. Hence, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed by observing that these matters are covered by the judgment dated 03.12.2009 passed in W.P.No.18036/2009.
Accordingly, these writ petitions fail and the same stand dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE PMR*