Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Unknown vs By Advs.Sri.T.B.Hood on 22 July, 2016

Author: Anu Sivaraman

Bench: Anu Sivaraman

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT:

                  THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

             MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1939

                               WP(C).No. 6508 of 2018




PETITIONER(S)
-------------


     SACHIN M.V,
     AGED 27 YEARS,
     S/O. SURENDRAN M.V. SOPANAM, MAITHANY VALAPPIL,
     KOYILANDY P.O., KOZHIKODE - 673 305.


     BY ADVS.SRI.T.B.HOOD
             SMT.M.ISHA
             SRI.AMAL KASHA




RESPONDENT(S):
------------

  1. TRAVANCORE-COCHIN MEDICAL COUNCILS,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, RED CROSS ROAD,
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 035.

  2. THE PRINCIPAL,
     KARUNA MEDICAL COLLEGE, VILAYODI, CHITTOOR, PALAKKAD - 678 103.


        R1 BY SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC
        R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-03-2018,
     THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:




TS
WP(C).No. 6508 of 2018 (K)
-------------------------



                             APPENDIX



PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------

EXHIBIT P1      TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL DEGREE
                CERTIFICATE DATED 22.07.2016 ISSUED TO THE
                PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P2      TRUE COPY OF THE COMPULSORY ROTATORY
                RESIDENTIAL INTERNSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE
                PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3      TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL DEGREE
                CERTIFICATE DATED 02.11.2017 ISSUED TO THE
                PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P4      TRUE COP OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 15.11.2017
                SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT COUNCIL TO THE 2ND
                RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5      TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22.12.2017 GIVEN BY
                THE RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6      TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.11.2017 GIVEN BY
                SRI.VENKIDESH   MANIKANDAN TO THE 2ND
                RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7      TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.01.2018
                SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT COUNCIL TO THE
                PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P8      TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.01.2018
                SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST
                RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9      TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE
                DATED 24.10.2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL
------------------------------

                                            /TRUE COPY/



                                            PS TO JUDGE

TS
16/03/2018

                      ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.6508 of 2018
                   ---------------------------------
             Dated this the 5th day of March, 2018


                        JUDGMENT

------------------

The petitioner, who had completed the MBBS Course from the Karuna Medical College, Palakkad had been issued with Exhibit P1 provisional Degree Certificate. He underwent one year internship in the same college from 8.10.2016 to 18.10.2017. On completion of the internship, the Principal of the College issued Internship Certificate to him. However, the first respondent issued Exhibit P7, directing the petitioner to undergo internship afresh, since the petitioner had not obtained provisional registration with the first respondent before the internship was started. It is contended that the completion of the internship by the petitioner cannot be taken into account.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent. It is contended that the fact that the provisional registration under the first respondent was not obtained by the petitioner before starting the internship, would only amount W.P.(C).No.6508 of 2018 2 to a procedural irregularity. It is contended that the Principal of the College had informed the 1 st respondent by Ext.P5, that the lack of provisional registration was not noticed and the petitioner had been allowed to continue and complete the internship. It is stated that he had made arrangements for making the application for provisional registration. It is therefore contended that Exhibit P7 communication issued to the petitioner which was without any notice to the petitioner and without considering the factual aspects of the matter is unsustainable.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that it is undoubtedly a requirement of law that the petitioner has to be provisionally registered with the first respondent to start the internship. It is submitted that the internship completed without provisional registration is not valid in law and the petitioner has therefore to undergo the internship afresh, after taking provisional registration from the first respondent.

4. I have considered the contentions advanced. It is the petitioner's case that he had made arrangements to submit the application for provisional registration but there was some lapse on the part of the person who was entrusted with the task. It is further clear that these aspects of the matter had W.P.(C).No.6508 of 2018 3 not been brought to notice of the first respondent since Exhibit P7 order was issued without notice. Though it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent that it would not be practical in all cases to issue notice to the affected parties before issuing orders of this nature, I am of the opinion that in the instant case, since the petitioner has already completed his internship which fact is certified by the college and the University, the petitioner's case on the facts of the matter is liable to be considered by the first respondent.

5. In the above view of the matter, it is directed that Exhibit P7 order will be treated as a show cause notice and Exhibit P8 will be treated as a petitioner's explanation for the same. The petitioner shall be heard and the orders shall be issued in the matter within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE sab