Karnataka High Court
Miss Vilohitha M vs Karnataka Examinations Authority on 31 July, 2018
Bench: A.S.Bopanna, Mohammad Nawaz
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
WRIT PETITION No.16907/2017 (EDN-RES)
c/w
WRIT PETITION No.22635/2018 (EDN-RES)
W.P.No.16907/2017
BETWEEN:
MISS VILOHITHA M
D/O DR. M. MAHESH BABU,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/O. NO.605, 21ST CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, 1ST STAGE,
NARAYANANGARA,
(BANK OFFICERS SOCIETY)
KANAKAPURA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560062.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADV. FOR
SMT. FARAH FATHIMA, ADV.)
AND:
KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY
18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD,
MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560012.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI N K RAMESH, ADV.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 05.04.2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT IN
-2-
CANCELLING PETITIONER'S ADMISSION TO MBBS COURSE
AND DIRECTING THE KIMS AND RGUHS TO WITHHOLD THE
DOCUMENTS OF THE PETITIONER, AS THE SAME IS HIGHLY
ADBITRARY ILLEGAL AND IN GROSS VIOLATION OF NATURAL
JUSTICE AT ANNEX-A AND ETC.
W.P.No.22635/2018
BETWEEN:
MISS VILOHITHA M
D/O DR. M. MAHESH BABU,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/O. NO.605, 21ST CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, 1ST STAGE,
NARAYANANGARA,
(BANK OFFICERS SOCIETY)
KANAKAPURA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560062.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADV. FOR
SMT. FARAH FATHIMA, ADV.)
AND:
1. KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY
18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD,
MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560012.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO.
2. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCES,
4TH T BLOCK, 4TH T BLOCK EAST,
PATTABHIRAMA NAGAR,
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560041.
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR,
3. KEMPEGOWDA INSTITUTE OF
MEDICAL SCIENCES
K.R. ROAD, V.V.PURAM,
PARVATHIPURAM,
VISHWESHWARAPURA,
BASAVANAGUDI,
BENGALURU - 560004.
-3-
KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI N K RAMESH, ADV. FOR R1 & R2
SRI K S DORESWAMY, ADV. FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO
ISSUE INTERNSHIP COMPLETION CERTIFICATE ALONG WITH
OTHER ORIGINAL CERTIFICATES/DOCUMENTS AS PER
PETITIONERS' REPRESENTATION DT.27.4.2018 & 14.5.2018
(ANNX-A & B) AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, A.S. BOPANNA. J., MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is common in both these petitions and the subject matter relates to a medical course undergone by the petitioner and in that regard the consideration with regard to the appropriateness of the order impugned dated 05.04.2017, also in that circumstance the claim as made by the petitioner for return of the documents which had been submitted by the petitioner at the time of admission. In that view these petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
-4-
2. The petitioner on being eligible to be considered for admission to the MBBS course had appeared through the respondent Karnataka Examination Authority ('KEA' for short) and was provided admission in the Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences for the academic year 2012-13. The admission order was made on 23.07.2012. The petitioner had sought admission under the physically handicapped quota claiming to suffer hearing impairment. The petitioner contends that the necessary documents as required to be considered under the physically handicapped quota had been submitted, pursuant to which the petitioner being selected under the said quota had joined the course. The course consisting of 4½ years was successfully completed and she also underwent the internship which presently is completed.
3. When this was the position, the respondents initiated action by issue of notice dated 14.07.2014 based on an allegation said to have been made by a third party that the petitioner does not suffer from hearing impairment and the seat as procured under the -5- physically handicapped quota is not justified. Pursuant thereto the respondents required the petitioner to undergo the medical examination. To that extent, a consideration was made by them to refer the petitioner to the NIMHANS and the report as available thereto was to be considered. The same was sent to the Bengaluru Medical College, but on taking note that the father of the petitioner was employed therein as the head of the department had thought it fit that the same be referred to Medical College at Mysore. Ultimately based on the report of Dr.Ravindra P.Gadag who is stated to have opined based on the available documents that the petitioner does not suffer from hearing disability the respondents have arrived at the conclusion that the approval of the admission granted in the case of the petitioner is to be withdrawn and the documents submitted by her is to be foreclosed. It is in that light the order dated 05.04.2017 is issued to the petitioner. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the same is before this Court in this petition. Consequent thereto since the documents of the petitioner has been -6- withheld, the connected petition in W.P.No.22635/2018 is filed.
4. In the above background, we have heard the learned senior counsel representing the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the respondent-KEA. In that background, we have perused the petition papers.
5. The requirement as contained in the Regulations governing the common entrance examination for the seats also provides for reservation for physically challenged category. The requirement therein is that the candidates with the physical disablement is required to submit the certificates as prescribed therein. The petitioner claims that the certificates as at Annexures-D and E to the petition dated 13.01.2012 and 02.12.2012 were submitted along with her application which had been verified by the KEA and accepting the same to satisfy the requirement had considered the case of the petitioner under the physically handicapped category. Thereafter the -7- petitioner has immediately joined the course and completed the same. It is in that background a consideration is necessary as to whether at a point when the petitioner had almost completed the course and was undergoing internship, the respondent was justified in arriving at a conclusion that the admission and approval thereto is liable to be cancelled only because an outsider had raised an issue in that regard.
6. As already noticed, the requirement provides for the appropriate certificate to be produced during the admission process as per the notification. If the documents are in order, only then they would thereafter consider a candidate under the said quota. In the instant facts, on such examination of the documents produced by the petitioner, the respondent KEA being satisfied have considered the same and allotted the seat. The petitioner has thereafter joined the course by paying substantial amount towards the fee to undergo the course and completed the course. In that circumstance, whether the action presently taken is to be approved is the question.
-8-
7. While taking note of this aspect we are certainly conscious that if ultimately any benefit is secured by playing fraud, certainly fraud will vitiate all other actions. Though being aware of the said legal position, what we are also to keep in view is that the petitioner who was a candidate for the medical examination was in her teens at the point when she had sought admission. The requirement of the admission process had been completed by her and thereafter she had joined the course. There is no material to conclude that she has played fraud when she had complied with the requirements and the KEA was satisfied by the compliance made.
8. Therefore in such circumstance when the course has been completed, the other aspects of the matter would also arise for consideration. One of the aspects which is also to be taken note is that when the issue had arisen before the Commissioner of Disabilities, that aspect was also taken note through the order dated 25.06.2015 and the proceedings in that regard was closed. Further the documents as produced -9- along with writ petition at Annexure-S series would indicate that in the subsequent academic years of her course, the petitioner has successfully completed and secured good marks in the examination. In that circumstance, we are required to take note of the nature of consideration made through the impugned order dated 05.04.2017 after nearly 5 years subsequent to the admission process being completed and the petitioner also having completed the course. In the course of consideration though a reference is made to the attempt made by the respondents to secure the petitioner for the medical examination, in any event the report of the NIMHANS was available which was passed on and thereafter since a physical examination could not be made, the report was taken note and based on the opinion of the doctor, on the available material a conclusion had been arrived that she does not suffer from disability. While taking note of this aspect, what we also notice is that at the initial stage when the admission was made, neither had the respondent raised objection that the documents relied on were not genuine
- 10 -
nor did any other candidate who had sought admission under the physically handicapped category challenge the denial of seat by contending that the petitioner did not belong to that category. On the other hand the KEA being satisfied had accepted the candidature.
9. Therefore, in that circumstance, at this stage, even if the admission of the petitioner is cancelled, the benefit would not accrue to any other candidate nor would any other purpose be served by denying the petitioner the benefit of the hard work she has put in to complete the course successfully. Therefore, keeping all these aspects in view we are of the opinion that the cancellation of the approval of the admission is not justified that too when the approval was made in the year 2012. Hence, on the facts as arising in the case, it was not appropriate to cancel in the year 2017 and that too based on the consideration of the nature as has been done herein.
10. In that view, the impugned order dated 05.04.2017 is quashed. A direction is issued to the
- 11 -
respondents to proceed further to verify the documents of the petitioner relating to her course such as the marks cards and if she has completed the same and also if the internship is completed, the petitioner be admitted to convocation and degree be conferred. The documents submitted by the petitioner for obtaining the admissions and also the testimonials for having completed the course be provided to the petitioner. The documents if available with the college shall be handed over to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, but not later than six weeks from the date on which a copy of this order is furnished.
The petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE AKC/bms