Madras High Court
State (Government Of Tamil Nadu) vs P.S.Sriram on 13 June, 2019
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, V.Bhavani Subbaroyan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.06.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
Review Application No.111 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.6323 of 2019
1.State (Government of Tamil Nadu)
Through its Secretary, Department of
Health and Family Welfare, Fort St.George
Chennai – 600 009.
2.Director of Medical Education
Directorate of Medical Education (DME)
156, Poonamallee High Road, Kilpauk
Chennai – 600 010 ... Petitioner
- Vs -
1. P.S.Sriram
2. Saad Aslam Khan
3. Neimenuo Kuotsu
4. Dr.Amit Kumar
5. Jyothis Puliyamkunnath
6. T.M.Vaishnavi
7. K.Kokila
8. Midhun Mohan
9. Vijay G
10. M.Ramya Jothi
11. Warang Omkar Sharad
12. V.Vishnupriya
13. Neha Dhok
14. Sugumaran Kandasamy
15. Balarisuk Byrsat
16. Anusree A Karun
17. Poornima K Nair
18. Uday Srinivas
19. Thmaraikannan
20. Poornima T
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
21. Merin Varghese
22. Martum Jokik
23. Ganga Chellamuthu
24. K.Sangheetha
25. Nishant Kumar Sahu
26. Pournami B
27. R.Srinath
28. K.Gayathri
29. Priyanka
30. Kethavath Anitha
31. Flaicy Varghese
32. Savitha Manokaran
33. Chidambaram Sethuraman
34. Vyas Narayan
35. Sanjana S.
36. Karthika Sankar
37. Suhan Dinesh Narayan
38. Vaishnavi V.K.
39. Ashwini Muthusamy
40. Kochami P.A.
41. Haritha
42. M.Amala Grace
43. Nandhini
44. Vidhya Mohan
45. Sharadha Sundararaman
46. Priyadharshini
47. Hangshing Thangalawmlal
48. Pradeep Ram S
49. J.Nivedita
50. G.Dhivyalakshmi
51. Nazia Hussain
52. Shruthi Jayapal
53. Rajesh M
54. Malavika
55. Lekshmi Mohan
56. Kaliraj Alwar Murugaraj
57. Susan Jacob
58. R Afreeb Nahar
59. Soundarya Balajee
60. Ajay Abraham
61. Thuraka Shilpa Reddy
62. Nivetha Kameswari V
63. Ann Mary Zacharias
64. Sarath R S
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
65. Kandkurtikar Rachana
66. G.Prasanth
67. Hridya Vasudevan
68. K.Lohit Sai
69. Sony P S
70. Teena K
71. Vidhya Rengaraju
72. C.S.Sri Sughanya
73. A.K.Roopa
74. S.Anu
75. Antony Thomas
76. Jayasree Rajendiran
77. Devi Krishna G.S.
78. K.Praveen
79. Sudha Janaky M S
80. Thomas Babu
81. R.Jay Ganesh
82. Ritika Gautam
83. Sneha Suresh
84. Gokul Prasannan
85. Swathy Raju
86. Trupti Narasimhappa
87. Gomathi
88. Reman Rajendran
89. A.Suja Rajan
90. Shraavan Kumar B
91. Manochithra
92. Swetha K
93. Vijayaragavan R
94. K.G.Raj Nihedan
95. A.Abdul Rahim
96. Ameena Aslam
97. Jithu George
98. Ashwini Rajasekaran
99. Krishna Kumar
100.Atchya Elangovan
101.Lalitha Rajalakshmi
102.Anusha Ramadoss
103.Treesa P Vattakuzhi
104.Jerrin C Joy
105.Aruna S K
106.Anupama S
107.C.Madhumitha
108.Raut Ashwini Sanjay
http://www.judis.nic.in
4
109.Rubu Anu
110.Poornima Nair
111.Sree Divya M
112.T D Varneikip Chiru
113.Prasanth J
114.Swathi Prakash J
115.P.Ezhil
116.Rojer David Binny V
117.Anbarasan S
118.G.Nagapriya
119.Sai Shiva G
120.Manju Muniyapp
121.Srinidhi V
122. R.Aiswarya
123.Dhivyaa M
124.Swati Gupta
125.Remya E
126.Shibin Sasidharan
127.Utpal Sutaria
128.N.Sudha Priyadharshini
129.Salahudheen M
130.Ajitha D
131.Saranya S
132.Abdul Latheef Abdul
133.Shirley T Leivon
134.S.Anbarasan
135.Arjun C
136.Ingersal N
137.Varun P.G
138.Kartavya Kavadya
139.Jerry Abraham Joseph
140.Sinju Sankar P
141.Ani Thampi
142.Shabin J
143.Suganya E
144.N.Ezhil
145.Lakshmi S.Subedar
146.Remya Parvathy R
147.Bogala Gowthami
148.Sruthi R
149.Inan Lollen
150.Vivek Nagappa
151.M.Srilaxmi
152.Delphin Supriya J
http://www.judis.nic.in
5
153.Saath Haridas
154.Aswathy B.S.
155.Jamkhopum Baite
156.Mohammed Thariq
157. Anju Rose George
158.K.Praveen
159. Meghana Selvaraj
160.R.Karthik
161.Namitha Rajendran
162.Sathiya T
163. Arun Govind
164.Aarushi Manu
165.Ishwarya Jeyaganthi
166.T.Rajakumari
167.Insha Mehraj Kak
168.Arul Murugan A
169.Arunkumar A
170.Niranjana Asokan
171.Arulselvan
172.S.Pravinselvam
173.J.Manoj
174.Amuthavalli K
175.Mohanapriya Arumugam
176.Jaya Jarika
177.Midhu K Prakash
178.Kaviya Murugesan
179.Gnaneshwari P
180.Deepika M
181.Hima surendran
182.Sanju S T
183.Arun Prasanth K
184.Ambuja Sekhar
185.J.Hemilda Perianayaki
186.Ashwini B
187.Kunal Kishor Taware
188.S.Murali Krishnan
189.S.Thalabatghk Kumara Vikram
190.Sanjeev P
191. Sanjana S
192.Ragini Rajan
193.Nikhil Raj R
194.Dr.B.Agni
195.Mr.Vasanth Karthikeyan
196.Abdulla Anchukandan
http://www.judis.nic.in
6
197.Pc Hmingmuanpuii
198.Anwika Kirti Kukjur
199.Jamsheer Vt
200.Dr Karthikeyan M
201.Dr.M.Mariam Habeeba
202.Dr.Vijayakumar A
203.Dr.Esakki
204.Dr.Subashini M.R
205.Sriradhu V.G
206.Sindhu Kalyanaraman
207.Meenaxi P Mehta
208.M.Y.Mohamed Yasar
209.The Registrar
Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University
Guindy, Chennai 600 025
210.The Registrar
Tamil Nadu Medical Council 914
Poonamallee Highroad Arumbakkam,
Chennai 600 106. ... Respondents
Prayer : Review Application under Section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule I of C.P.C., to
grant against the judgment dated 23.04.2019 in W.A.No.799 of 2019.
For Petitioner : Mrs.Narmadha Sampath,
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr.T.M.Pappiah
Special Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr.R.Arumugam
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) This review application has been filed by the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Director of Medical Education, seeking to review the judgment in W.A.No.799 of 2019 dated 23.04.2019. By the said judgment and order, the appeal filed by the review petitioner / State was dismissed.
http://www.judis.nic.in 7
2. Heard Mrs.Narmadha Sampath, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.T.M.Pappiah, learned Special Government Pleader. We have also heard Dr.Indumathy, Deputy Director, Directorate of Medical Education.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that there is an error, which is apparent on the face of the judgment and requests that the Court may review the judgment and give an opportunity to the appellants to place all facts before this Court to justify their stand that the respondents / writ petitioners are bound by the terms of the bond executed by them and they are required to serve the Government of Tamil Nadu for a period of two years, failing which they have to pay a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-.
4. Learned Additional Advocate General would further submit that the letter addressed by the Director of Medical Education dated 17.07.2017, and the earlier communication of the Secretary to the Government, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 05.02.2016 do not pertain to academic session 2015-16, during which session the respondents / writ petitioners were admitted. It is submitted that there are several internal communications, which were not placed before this Court to justify the stand of the appellants that the communication dated 17.07.2017 of the Director of Medical Education would be wholly inapplicable to the respondents / writ petitioners.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that pursuant to the interim order dated 01.04.2019 in W.A.No.799 of 2019, the fourth respondent Dr.Amit Kumar http://www.judis.nic.in 8 paid a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-, so as to enable him to take back his original certificates, as he has secured admission to Post Graduate Course, and accordingly the certificates were returned. It is further submitted that after the writ appeal was dismissed, in which we had issued direction that the amount paid by Dr.Amit Kumar should be refunded the entire amount, the appellants have complied with the same and the amount has been refunded to Dr.Amit Kumar.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the bond was “obtained” from the respondents / writ petitioners and it is not contemplated under the prospectus issued by the National Board of Examination ('NBE' for brevity) for M.D / M.S / Post Graduate Diploma Courses, 2015 AIPGMEE 2015. Further referring to the Frequently Answered Questions (FAQs), in particular, the answer given to question No.30, it is submitted that the information received from various participating medical colleges should be made available in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare website. However, no such information was available in the website. Therefore, it is the submission of the respondents / writ petitioners that when the prospectus issued by the NBE does not provide for executing a bond, the bond “obtained” from the respondents / writ petitioners would not be binding and they are not required to serve the Government of Tamil Nadu nor they are liable to pay any bond amount.
7. Countering the said submission, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the prospectus issued by the NBE clearly states that the stipend / fee structure / course duration / bond amount / rendering of service in rural / tribal area / other conditions etc., http://www.judis.nic.in 9 may vary from State to State and Institution to Institution and the prospectus clearly states that neither the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare / Directorate of Medical Education or the NBE will be responsible on that count. Further, it is submitted that the information furnished by the participating medical colleges was available in the website of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, and that the respondents / writ petitioners were fully aware of the bond condition and hence they cannot resile from the same.
8. We find that the materials placed before us at this juncture and the stand taken by the appellants before us was neither the point argued when the writ appeal was decided nor the appellants took such a stand in the writ petition, in which no counter affidavit was filed.
9. Though this may be the position, since the matter concerns not only with the welfare of respondents / writ petitioners, but also the welfare of the people of the State of Tamil Nadu, who are entitled to get the best expert medical care, we are of the view that the writ appeal has to be heard afresh, wherein the parties should be permitted to canvass all the points and place facts and materials so as to take a comprehensive decision in this matter. Insofar as Dr.Amit Kumar, fourth respondent herein is concerned, since the amount of Rs.20,00,000/- paid by him as bond amount has already been returned to him, after the appeal was dismissed by us on 23.04.2019, the appellants / State will not be entitled to recover the same from him. However, we make it clear that this shall not be taken as a precedent by the respondents / writ petitioners for any other matter. http://www.judis.nic.in 10
10. For the above reasons, the review application is allowed and the judgment dated 23.04.2019 in W.A.No.799 of 2019 is recalled. The writ appeal is restored to the file of this Court, to be heard and decided by the appropriate Division Bench afresh. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11. After we have dictated the order, it was mentioned by Mr.R.Arumugam, learned counsel for the respondents / writ petitioners have completed their Post Graduate Course but they are unable to get the same registered with the State Medical Council. Dr.Indumathy, Deputy Director of Medical Education, who is present in Court submitted that they have forwarded the necessary papers for registration to the Tamil Nadu State Medical Council in batches. Insofar as the candidates who are from other States is concerned, as of now no observation can be made and the matter has to be decided when the writ appeal is heard afresh.
(T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 07-06-2019 KST Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No http://www.judis.nic.in 11 To
1. The Registrar Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University Guindy, Chennai 600 025
2. The Registrar Tamil Nadu Medical Council 914 Poonamallee Highroad Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106.
http://www.judis.nic.in 12 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
(kst) Rev.Application No.111 of 2019 13.06.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in