Karnataka High Court
Ms. Girija Agarwal vs Union Of India on 12 August, 2014
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.17631/2014 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
MS.GIRIJA AGARWAL,
DAUGHTER OF ALOK AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS,
AND RESIDING AT B4-404,
SHRIRAM SPANDHANA APARTMENTS,
CHALLAGHATTA,
BANGALORE-560 092,
AND REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER,
AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
MR.ALOK AGARWAL,
SON OF NARENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA.M, SR.COUNSEL
FOR CREST LAW PARTNERS)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE,
SANSAD MARG,
NEW DELHI-110 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY.
2. CENTRAL BOARD OF
SECONDARY EDUCATION,
ALL INDIA PRE MEDICAL/
PRE DENTAL ENTRANCE TEST UNIT,
SHIKSHA KENDRA,
2-COMMUNITY CENTRE,
2
PREET VIHAR, DELHI-110 092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA,
POCKET 14, SECTOR-8,
DWARAKA, NEW DELHI-110 077
BY ITS PRESIDENT. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GOWHAR UNNISA, ASG FOR R1
SRI M.R.SHAILENDRA, ADV. FOR R2
SRI N.KHETTY, ADV. FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DECLARE THAT PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE ALL INDIA PRE MEDICAL PRE
DENTAL ENTRANCE TEST AND TO BE CONSIDERED FOR
THE 15% ALL INDIA QUOTA SEATS FOR GOVERNMENT
MEDICAL / DENTAL COLLEGES OF INDIA AND DIRECT
THE R-2 TO INCLUDE THE PETITIOENR IN THE MERIT
LIST FOR THE 15% ALL INDIA QUOTA SEATS FOR
GOVERNMENT MEDICAL / DENTAL COLLEGES OF INDIA
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Though the petitioner has sought for a declaration that the petitioner is an overseas citizen of India and she is entitled to a seat under the 15% All India Quota in the Government Medical/ Dental Colleges of India, the petitioner has subsequently secured a seat in the Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puduchery. Hence, the question raised at the instance of the petitioner would 3 not survive for consideration. However, the consideration of the question is left open to be adverted in an appropriate proceedings if the need arises therein.
In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE ST