Kerala High Court
Pooja.M vs Admission Supervisory Committee For ... on 14 November, 2016
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon, V Shircy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2017/1ST ASHADHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 13596 of 2017 (Y)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
1. POOJA.M.,
AGED 21 YEARS, D/O SIVASANKARA PILLAI, PUTHAN VEEDU,
INCHAKADU, MYLAM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 560.
2. ANUPRIYA VASUDEVAN,
AGED 20 YEARS, D/O VASUDEVAN, AMARI, THIRUVANGAD P.O.,
THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 103.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.B.HOOD
SMT.M.ISHA
SRI.AMAL KASHA
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, T.C.15/1553-4,
PRASANTHI BUILDINGS, M.P.APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
2. KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THRISSUR-680 596.
3. COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
4. PRINCIPAL,
KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, ANJARAKKANDY P.O.,
KANNUR-670 612.
R1 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC,
R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR,SC,
R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM
BY SRI A.ABDUL KHARIM, SC, KSFDC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 07-06-2017, ALONG WITH WPC.NO. 13695 OF 2017 AND CONNECTED
CASES THE COURT ON 22-06-2017 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).No. 13596 of 2017 (Y)
-----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE IST
RESPONDENT COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 31.3.2017 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NEET RESULT OF THE IST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NEET RESULT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR
2016-17 MBBS ADMISSION OF THE KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.9.2016 ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE APPROVING EXT.P5 PROSPECTUS.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 23.9.2016 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.30697/2016 AND CONNECTED CASE.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE QUICK PRINT OUT OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PRINT OUT OF THE ONLINE
APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT SUBMITTED BY THE IST
PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION.
EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE QUICK PRINT OUT OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PRINT OUT OF THE ONLINE
APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION.
EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.9.2016 ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.10.2016 PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION(C) NO.32186/2016 AND
CONNECTED CASES.
EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE DATED 6.10.2016 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P18: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE
COURT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (WITHOUT ANNEXURES).
2/-
-2-
WP(C).No. 13596 of 2017 (Y)
EXHIBIT P19: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.10.2016 IN WRIT PETITION
(C) NO.30697/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES.
EXHIBIT P20: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.12.2016 OF THE HON'BLE
SUPREME COURT IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
NOS. 35374-35375/2016.
EXHIBIT P21: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE REGARDING MBBS ADMISSION IN KARUNA MEDICAL
COLLEGE, PALAKKAD
EXHIBIT P22: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.3.2017 IN SPECIAL LEAVE
PETITION NOS.32580-32581/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES.
EXHIBIT P23: TRUE COPY OF THE SPOT ADMISSION DETAILS OF K.M.C.T. MEDICAL
COLLEGE.
EXHIBIT P24: TRUE COPY OF THE SPOT ADMISSION DETAILS OF MALABAR
MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL.
EXHIBIT P25: TRUE COPY OF THE SPOT ADMISSION DETAILS OF BELIEVERS
CHURCH MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
-----------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
[CASE REPORTABLE]
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON & SHIRCY V., JJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C) Nos. 13596, 13695, 13984, 15088,
16409, 16410, 16411, 16918 and 17165 of 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 22nd day of June, 2017
JUDGMENT
Ramachandra Menon , J.
Correctness and sustainability of the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by the Admission Supervisory Committee [ASC in short] cancelling all the admissions made to the first year MBBS course for the academic year 2016 - 2017 in the Kannur Medical College is under challenge in all these writ petitions filed by the students who have got admission in the said college. The main ground of challenge is that, the specific direction given by this Court as per the common judgment dated 28.10.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 30697 of 2016 and connected cases to identify the meritorious candidates and to secure their admissions has been flouted by the ASC, finalizing the proceedings in a cursory and casual manner and hence the challenge.
2. W.P.(C) Nos. 13596 and 13695 of 2017 were brought up for consideration on the last working day of this Court before commencement of the mid-summer vacation [i.e. on 12.04.2017]. W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 2 : Though the chain of litigations stretching up to the Apex Court after passing the judgment by this Court [in W.P.(C) No. 30697 of 2016 and connected cases] stands adverted to, it was sought to be asserted by the petitioners that validity of the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by the ASC in the case of 'Kannur Medical College' was not considered by the Apex Court, though there is an observation and finding that a similar order passed on the same day by the ASC in respect of 'Karuna Medical College' has been held as not liable to be interfered; while dismissing all the SLPs preferred by the Karuna Medical College, by the Kannur Medical College by the students of those colleges and also by the Medical Council of India. The said writ petitions [W.P.(C) Nos. 13596 and 13695 of 2017] were got admitted on 12.04.2017, also granting an interim order to the effect that continuance of classes for the students admitted for the year 2016 -17 will be solely at the risk of the management of the college and at the risk of the students [writ petitioners] and that they will not be entitled to claim any benefit on the basis of such continuance.
3. The other writ petitions came to be filed subsequently W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 3 : and were brought up for admission, when it was submitted from the part of the respondents that the issue had become final by virtue of the verdict passed by the Apex Court and hence the writ petitions were not maintainable. This made all the writ petitions to be clubbed together, to be heard on the question of maintainability and to decide whether it was still open for this Court to consider the same, after dismissal of the SLPs by the Apex Court as per order dated 22.03.2017. It is accordingly, that all these matters have been listed together and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners were heard in this regard.
4. Sri. M. K. Damodaran, the learned senior advocate led the arguments on behalf of the petitioners. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the other petitioners as well, besides Smt. Mary Benjamin - the learned standing counsel for the Admission Supervisory Committee, Mr. P. Sreekumar - the learned standing counsel appearing for 1st respondent - Kerala University of Health Sciences, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations and Mr.George Poothottam - the learned counsel appearing on behalf of W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 4 : the 'Kannur Medical College' at length. Pleadings and proceedings are referred to, as given in W.P.(C) No. 13695 of 2017, except where it is separately mentioned in relation to the context.
5. The crux of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners is that, Ext. P17 order dated 22.03.2017 passed by the Apex Court, where a finding has been rendered to the effect that the Court did not find any ground to interfere with Ext. P16 order dated 14.11.2016, does not relate to the order passed by the ASC in the case of 'Kannur Medical College'. According to the petitioners, the said finding is only in respect of 'Karuna Medical College' and that the SLPs filed by the 'Kannur Medical College' and the students of the said college have been separately dealt with on the last page of Ext. P17 [where reference is only to the verdict passed by the Division Bench of this Court and not to the ASC], which alone was the subject matter of challenge before the Apex Court. It is stated that, none of the petitioners, neither the 'Kannur Medical College' nor the students of the said college or even the Medical Council of India, who filed SLP Nos.3952 and 3882 of 2017, had raised any challenge against the orders passed W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 5 : by the ASC with regard to the admission in the 'Kannur Medical College'. It is stated that the observations made by the ASC, particularly in paragraphs 13 and 14 of Ext. P16 order, are totally in violation of the observations and direction given by this Court in paragraphs 25 and 26 and in the concluding paragraph [containing direction] of Ext. P15 and hence the challenge. It is stated that, since the said challenge is being raised for the first time before this Court, the writ petitions are quite maintainable.
6. Though some submissions have been made with regard to the 'merit' as well, this Court finds it fit and proper to deal with the 'maintainability' of the writ petitions first and only if the writ petitions are held as maintainable [after dismissal of the SLPs by the Apex Court], would it become possible for this Court to consider the merit of the case, of course, after further hearing, if so necessitated. As such, the scrutiny is confined only on the question of 'maintainability', for the time being.
7. Smt. Mary Benjamin, the learned standing counsel for the Admission Supervisory Committee submits that the version of the petitioners, now put forth before this Court, that scope of Ext.P16 W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 6 : order passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016 was not considered by the Supreme Court is totally incorrect. It is stated that in none of the SLPs filed by the MCI, Kannur Medical College, Karuna Medical College or the students of the aforesaid institutions, had the orders passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016 been produced. In fact, the SLPs were preferred challenging Ext.P15 verdict passed by this Court and it was thereafter that the ASC passed the order dated 14.11.2016. It is pointed out that the Medical Council of India had filed SLP Nos. 3882 and 3952 of 2017 mainly challenging the directions given by this Court in Ext. P15 verdict, whereby the claim of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 33291 and 33257 of 2016 was also directed to be considered, within the extended time. The contention raised by the MCI was that, as per the schedule fixed by the Apex Court, time limit was to expire on 30.09.2016 and as such, no direction ought to have been issued by this Court, to have the fresh claims considered within the 'extended time' till 07.10.2016, as the time extension was only to complete the already on-going exercise. The MCI had also not challenged the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by ASC, either in the 'Kannur W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 7 : Medical College case' or in the case of 'Karuna Medical College'; whereas the challenge was only in respect of extension of time beyond 30.09.2016 for allotment.
8. The learned standing counsel for the ASC further pointed out that the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by the Admission Supervisory Committee in 'Kannur Medical College' case was virtually produced by the management of the College itself along with affidavit dated 09.02.2017 filed before the Apex Court [sworn to by Dr. Hashim] in S.L.P. Nos. 35374 and 35375 of 2016. In the case of 'Karuna Medical College', the similar order dated the same day i.e. 14.11.2016 was produced by the ASC along with its counter affidavit filed in S.L.P. Nos. 32580 and 32581 of 2016. As a matter of fact, when the SLP preferred in the case of 'Karuna Medical College' had come up for consideration before the Apex Court on 15.11.2016, an oral submission was made to the effect that the ASC had already passed an order on the previous day [on 14.11.2016] cancelling the admissions, which made by the Apex Court to pass an interim order on that day [on 15.11.2016] permitting the students to continue, for the time being. Similar W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 8 : order was passed subsequently in the case of 'Karuna Medical College' as well. All the SLPs were considered together and the arguments were addressed before the Apex Court as to the course and events.
9. The learned standing counsel for Admission Supervisory Committee submits that, it was none other than Sri. Kapil Sibal, the learned senior counsel, who addressed the Apex Court on behalf of the 'Kannur Medical College'. It is stated that the learned counsel sought to assert and argue before the Apex Court that the order passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016 was without hearing the College and thus, in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Apex Court, in the said circumstance, gave an opportunity to the Kannur and Karuna Medical Colleges to address the Court and argue the matter 'on merits'. In the course of arguments, the order passed by the ASC giving an 'opportunity of hearing' and to produce the documents, as dealt with in paragraph 12, was brought to the notice of the Court. The said paragraph reads as follows :
"12. On 14.11.2016, Mr. Jabbar, the Chairman of the Medical College, Mr. Monichan Thomas, P.R.O. and Ms. Naseera S., of the Medical College appeared W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 9 : before the ASC and submitted the documents. Their submissions were heard. However, the documents so submitted did not cover those demanded, as per the communication dated 2.11.2016. Till today the Medical College has not produced any further documents and informed over phone that the College has nothing more to submit. Hence, with the available documents, the ASC is passing this order."
On bringing the above vital aspect to the notice of the Apex Court rebutting the contention as to the denial of opportunity of hearing and violation of the principles of natural justice, no further submissions were made in this regard and the Apex Court rendered a finding on merit; which is common in all SLPs, as given in the opening sentence of Ext. P17 dated 22.03.2017 holding that the Court did not find any ground to interfere with the order dated 14.11.2016. It is also pointed out before this Court by the learned standing counsel for the ASC that a chance was sought for to challenge the order dated 14.11.2016 before this Court, but, it was not granted by the Apex Court.
10. In the case of 'Karuna Medical College', the Apex Court took note of the fact that, by virtue of the course and proceedings W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 10 : pursued by the Committee, 30 students were identified as the more meritorious candidates, who replaced the less meritorious students already admitted by the College. It was in the said circumstance, that the Apex Court passed an order protecting their rights in the very same order, causing them to be adjusted and accommodated against the vacancies of the next academic year 2017- '18, with proportionate reduction in the total intake of students by the 'Kannur Medical College' in the said academic year. It is stated that the matter has attained finality in the said circumstances and hence that present writ petitions are not maintainable before this Court. The learned counsel adds that, while passing the said verdict [Ext. P17], the Apex Court vacated all the interim orders, whereby the students were permitted to continue, when the SLPs were admitted.
13. According to Mr. Sree Kumar, the learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent University, the version of the petitioners that the opening sentence of Ext.P17 order that the Supreme Court 'did not find any ground to interfere in order dated 14.11.2016' would apply only to 'Karuna Medical College' and not W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 11 : to 'Kannur Medical College' is thoroughly wrong and misconceived. As a matter of fact, such an observation is common, as in the SLPs filed by MCI [i.e. SLP (C) Nos. 3952 and 3882 of 2017], neither the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by the ASC in the case of 'Kannur Medical College', nor the order dated the same day passed in the case of 'Karuna Medical College' was subjected to challenge. Still, the Apex Court rendered the said finding immediately after reference to the SLPs filed by MCI, which shows the common colour and characteristics of the order. It is also pointed out by the learned standing counsel that the version of the petitioners that in the latter portion of the order dealing with the SLPs of the Kannur Medical College, reference is only to Ext. P15 verdict passed by this Court and not to Ext.P16 order passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016 holds no water at all. The said portion of the order obviously refers to the SLPs filed by the Karuna Medical College as well and if the version of the petitioners is accepted, then it may be open for the 'Karuna Medical College' also to contend that since there is no reference to the order dated 14.11.2016 passed by the ASC in that portion, but for reference to the Division Bench judgment of this W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 12 : Court [after mentioning the numbers of their SLPs], the mentioning of the order dated 14.11.2016, in the opening sentence of the order passed by the Apex Court is not applicable to Karuna Medical College as well, which is rather puerile. The learned standing counsel further submits that the 'Kannur Medical College', after passing Ext.P17 order by the Apex Court on 22.03.2017, had filed review petitions [numbered as R.P. Nos. 1208 and 1209 of 2017] seeking to review the above order, wherein interference was declined and the review petitions were dismissed, as stated in paragraph 3 of the statement dated 22.05.2017 filed on behalf of the University. It is also pointed out that, if any doubt or confusion was there in the minds of the petitioners, it was for them to have had the position got clarified from the Supreme Court, without which no proceeding is maintainable before this Court. We find considerable force in the said submission.
12. As a matter of fact, Ext.P15 common judgment was passed by this Court giving specific directions [as contained in the concluding paragraph], which is reproduced below, for convenience of reference.
W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 13 : "In the above facts and circumstances, all the above writ petitions are disposed of in the following terms :
7 The interim order passed by this Court on 06.10.2016 with regard to the course pursued by the Committee effecting 'de-reservation' of the Management quota seats is made absolute.
7 It shall be for the Admission Supervisory Committee to scrutinize all the relevant records to be produced by the petitioner Institutions with regard to the entire admissions made by them in respect of the 100 seats and other concerned as mentioned above, including the copies of applications stated as submitted 'online' and weed out the applicants, if any, came through other modes.
7 Right of the eligible students to get admitted, based on the inter-se merit among the students already admitted by the petitioner Institutions and those identified by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations in the spot allotment held on 07.10.2016 and the relative claim of the petitioners in W.P(C) Nos. 33291 and 33257 of 2016 shall be considered and finalized by the Committee after hearing the petitioner Institutions.
7 The petitioners shall produce all the relevant records W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 14 : in connection with the admissions as aforesaid before the Committee by 10.00 am on 31.10.2016 and the proceedings shall be finalized by the Committee at the earliest.
7 With regard to the fee structure, the petitioner Institutions shall produce audited balance sheet and such other relevant records, for the relevant years, as called for by the Committee, for regulating the fees in terms of the provisions of the Act 19 of 2006, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
7 The Committee shall finalize the proceedings with regard to the regulation and fixation of annual fee payable by students concerned within a further period of three months, of course, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner Institutions. 7 If the Committee finds that the Annual Fee finalized by the Committee after perusing the relevant records and after hearing the petitioner Institutions is less than the fee stipulated in the Prospectus and collected from the students concerned, further course of action shall be provided, either to cause the excess to be refunded or set off against the annual fee payable for the future years.
W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 15 : 7 Necessary orders shall also be passed for causing the Bank Guarantee, furnished by the students concerned with regard to the satisfaction future annual fee, to be modified to an appropriate extent.
7 Consequential orders shall be issued by the Committee with regard to the registration of the eligible students by the Statutory authorities concerned.
7 The petitioner Institutions shall satisfy the cost ordered @ Rs.1,00,000/- each (Rupees One lakhs each] each to the Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Ernakulam within one month, failing which, necessary certificate shall be issued by the Registrar General to the beneficiary concerned for realization of the amount by way of appropriate steps.
Considering the larger public interest involved and to safe guard the rights and interest of the students and others at large, it shall be incorporated hereafter in the Prospectus of all concerned, that particulars of applications [to be submitted only 'online'], schedule of dates in respect of the various steps/procedures in connection with the admission, particulars of the defects noted, if any, date enabling the students to rectify the defects, particulars of rejection of application, if any, with reasons, particulars of W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 16 : the list of admitted students, in the different rounds of allotment; 'Waiting list' of the candidates on inter-se merit to be considered for spot admission in respect of the vacancies, if any, resulted on or before the cut off date etc. shall be simultaneously published in the website of the Committee as well, along with publication to be effected in the website of the College. Necessary orders in this regard shall be incorporated in the 'Order of Approval' of the Prospectus and it shall be a part of 'Agreement', if any, executed between the self-financing institutions and the Government and also the relevant G.O.s if any, issued in this connection. "
13. It was pursuant to the above verdict that the matter was considered by the ASC, who passed Ext.P16 order, paragraphs 12 to 14 of which read as follows :
"12. On 04.11.2016, Mr. Jabbar, the Chairman of the Medical College, Mr. Monichan Thomas, P.R.O. and Ms. Naseera S., of the Medical College appeared before the ASC and submitted the documents. Their submissions were heard. However, the documents so submitted did not cover those demanded, as per the communication dated 02.11.2016. Till today the Medical College has not produced any further documents and informed over phone that the College has W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 17 : nothing more to submit. Hence, with the available documents, the ASC is passing this order.
13. The ASC has scrutinised the 'online application' forms submitted by the Medical College. Even a cursory look of the applications show that they are not actual 'online applications'. The forms do not show the name of the Medical College to which the applications were made. It doesn't carry photograph of the applicant. There is no signature of the applicant, either digital or scanned. There is not application date. On the whole the submitted applications only show that they have been prepared for the purpose of submitting before the ASC as an attempt to claim the online application system. Event he documents submitted before the CEE on 07.10.2016, as per the interim order of the Hon'ble High Court, these applications were not seen submitted for consideration, as reported by the CEE.
14. Even while granting stay of the Centralised Counselling by the CEE, the Hon'ble High Court has passed specific condition that the College shall resort to online application admissions only. But the same has now been violated by the College. The scrutiny of the submitted application forms clearly show that they are not the online applications, but the same have been created for the W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 18 : purpose of submitting before the ASC. These forms cannot be accepted as submitted by any of the admitted students through online mode. Hence the MBBS admission 2016-17 has been done by the Medical College without any transparency and the merit is compromised. The admissions are randomly made from the list. All the details are not published in the Medical College website, as directed. Thus, all the admissions are in violation of the laid down norms, directions and orders. Therefore, the MBBS 2016- 17 admissions of Kannur Medical College cannot be approved."
As obvious from the said order, the insinuation is made only against the course and proceedings pursued by the College in the matter of giving admissions to the students concerned. No supporting materials were produced before the ASC to substantiate the admission, to the requisite extent, as discussed by the Committee, despite the opportunity given in this regard. Admittedly, the 'Kannur Medical College' as well as the students of the said College were represented before the Apex court and all the SLPs, including SLPs filed by both the MCI and the 'Karuna Medical College' were heard together; leading to Ext.P17 verdict. W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 19 :
14. When writ petition Nos. 13596 and 13695 of 2017 came up for admission before this Court [on the last working day before the closure of Court for mid-summer vacation], the following interim order was passed, in both the cases:-
"Admit.
Standing counsel takes notice on behalf of R1 University. Standing counsel takes notice on behalf of R2 Admission Supervisory Committee. Govt. Pleader takes notice on behalf of R3. Notice to R4 through speed post.
Continuance of classes for the students admitted for the year 2016-17 will be solely at the risk of the management of the College and at the risk of the students who are petitioners herein, and they will not be entitled to claim any benefit on the basis of such continuation."
This Court only said that continuance of classes for the students admitted for the academic year 2016 - '17 would be solely at the risk of the management of the college and the students concerned and that they would not be entitled to claim any benefit on the basis of the such continuation. It has to be borne in mind that the students are continuing their studies by virtue of the said interim W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 20 : order, though at their risk. This means, they will be compelled to satisfy the annual fee by the management and if these matters are finally heard and adjudicated on the maintainability/merit, as the case may be, and ultimately if the students lose the game, the injury may be too hard to bear with. The management also may be reluctant to return the tuition fees, having imparted the learning and this will make the students bankrupt, because of the money borrowed from financial institutions without any fruitful purpose, having no chance to get any degree. As such, continuance of the students in the college, if they are otherwise not eligible, will only be detrimental to their rights and they have to be told at the earliest, as to where do they stand. This is more so, in view of the observations made in the ruling rendered by the Apex Court in Dental Council of India Vs. Dr. Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal [2012 (2) KLT SN 45 (C. No. 62) SC], the relevant portion of which is reproduced below :
"It is perspicuous that Court should not pass interim orders in matters of admission, more so, when institution had not been accorded approval. Such kind of interim orders are like to cause chaos, anarchy and W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 21 : uncertainty. And, there is no reason for creating such situation. There is no justification or requirement. High Court may feel that while exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution, it can pass such orders with certain qualifiers as has been done by impugned order, but it really does not save situation. It is because an institution which has not been given approval for course, gets a premium. That apart, by virtue of interim order, court grants approval in a way which is subject matter of final adjudication before it. There is no reason to invite a disaster by way of an interim order. A Judge has to constantly remind himself about precedents in field and not to be swayed away by his own convictions. In present case, impugned order passed by High Court in matters of admission is absolutely unsustainable. But controversy does not end there. It is admitted position that respondent college has been granted approval for academic session 2017-2018. By virtue of interim order passed by High Court, three students had been admitted and they are prosecuting their studies. Supreme Court intend to strike a balance. Students who have been admitted shall be allowed to continue their courses, but their seats shall be adjusted from academic session 2017-2018. Respondent college cannot be allowed to get W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 22 : a premium. Grant of bounty is likely to allow such institutions to develop an attitude of serendipity. Such a culture is inconceivable."
15. It was after hearing all the parties concerned, that the Apex Court arrived at a finding that the Court did not find any tenable ground to interfere with the order passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016, as given in the opening sentence of Ext. P17 order; though it is under the heading with reference to the number of SLPs filed by the MCI. 'Concession' was only given to the 30 students, who came to be subsequently identified by the Committee as eligible to be admitted, in place of the wrong admissions given by the Management and accordingly, their rights were sought to be protected by directing them to be accommodated against the vacancies of the next academic year 2017 - '18, with consequential reduction in the actual intake in respect of the said year. No such benefit was given to any other students and in particular, the students who are stated as admitted by the 'Kannur Medical College'. The interim orders passed earlier by the Apex Court permitting the students to continue came to be vacated, as specifically ordered in the penultimate sentence of W.P.(C) No. 13596 of 2017 and connected cases : 23 : Ext.P17 order of the Apex Court passed on 22.03.2017. This being the position, the version of the petitioners that correctness of Ext.P16 order passed by the ASC on 14.11.2016 was never considered by the Apex Court and hence it is to be dealt with by this Court in these writ petitions, is not liable to be entertained. The doors are shut for ever before the petitioners in view of the finalization of the proceedings before the Apex Court. This Court finds that these writ petitions are not maintainable. In the said circumstances all these writ petitions are dismissed.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE SHIRCY V., JUDGE kmd