- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
ASHWINI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30THDAY OF JANUARY 2017
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A N VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NOS.52844-52845/2016 (EDN-MED-ADM)
BETWEEN:
1.ASHWINI
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
D/O VAIJANATH
H.NO.9-350/8/77,
NEAR CHANNMALLESHWAR TEMPLE,
SHAHBAZAR, KALABURGI-585 101
2.SACHIN REDDY
MINOR, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
S/O ANNAREDDY,
83/1, AT POST KITTA,
BASAVAKALYAN TALUK,
BIDAR DISTRICT-585 401
REPRESENTED BY FATHER ANNAREDDY
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI AJOY KUMAR PATIL, ADVOCATE)
1
AND:
1.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE
SERVICES (MEDICAL EDUCATION)
VIKASA SOUDHA,
DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001
2.THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION
ANAND RAO CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-560 009
3.MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA
POCKET-14, SECTOR 8, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI-110 077
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
4.RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES
4TH "T"BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 041
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
5.ASSOCIATION OF MINORITY PROFESSIONAL
COLLEGES IN KARNATAKA,
UNIT NO.205, LAKSHMI APARTMENTS
NO.6, CORNWELL ROAD,
LANGFORD GARDEN, RICHMOND TOWN,
BENGALURU-560 025
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
6.AKASH EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT TRUST ®
A CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PRASHANTH NAGAR,
DEVANAHALLI, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 110
2
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
SHRI.PRABHAKAR H.RAMDAS
SON OF SHRI.H.S.RAMADAS, AGED 41 YEARS.
7.AKASH INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND
RESEARCH CENTRE
PRASANNAHALLI ROAD, NEAR KEMPEGOWDA
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, DEVANAHALLI,
BANGALORE RURAL - 562 110,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
SHRI.PRABHAKAR H.RAMDAS,
SON OF SHRI.H.S.RAMADAS, AGED 41 YEARS.
8.MOOGAMBIGAI CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL
TRUST ®
A CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,
HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT RR MEDICAL
COLLEGE, NO.202, KAMBIPURA COLLEGE CAMPUS,
MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560074,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
SHRI.S.JEYABALAN, SON OF SHRI.B.SEETHARAMAN,
AGED 49 YEARS.
9.RAJARAJESWARI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL
CAMPUS AT NO.202, KAMBIPURA COLLEGE CAMPUS,
MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 074,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
SHRI.S.JEYABALAN, SON OF SHRI.B.SEETHARAMAN,
AGED 49 YEARS.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT NILOFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI N K RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
SRI A.LOBO, ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND R6 TO R9)
3
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO DIRECT THE R-5 TO ALLOT MBBS SEATS TO THE
PETITIONERS IN THE MEMBER COLLEGES BASED ON
THEIR RANKING IN NEET-2016 UNDER GENERAL
CATEGORY AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5 to 9 have tendered the joint memo for settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent Nos.5 to 9.
2. The said joint memo is duly signed by the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. As stated by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the respective respondents, the parties have duly signed the agreement in the joint settlement. An affidavit has also been filed by the Co-
4
ordinator of Association of Minority Professional Colleges in Karnataka.
3. The learned Advocates appearing for the petitioners as well as for respondent Nos.5 to 9 pray that in view of the aforesaid settlement, the writ petitions may be disposed of in terms of the settlement and the undertaking given by respondent Nos.5 to 9.
4. As such, since it is a settlement declared before the Court in the course of hearing by the petitioners and respondent Nos.5 to 9, we do not see any impediment in recording of such settlement.
5. However, Mr.N.Khetty, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.3 - MCI contended that without the presence of MCI, no order could be passed by this Court and in support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Medical Council of India Vs. Swati Sethi And Others
5
reported at (2004) 5 SCC 798 and the another decision of the Apex Court in the case of Medical Council of India Vs. Naina Verma And Others reported at (2005)
12 SCC 626 and he submitted that in view of the aforesaid two decisions, the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners for deletion of MCI may not be granted. He further contended that unless and until the matter is examined by the Court and the finding is recorded about any illegality committed by the College or the rights of the petitioners-students as the case may be, this Court may not even record the settlement. Therefore he submitted that the attempt to get the seal of the Court by way of settlement produced in the present proceedings may not be entertained.
6. We may at the outset also record that in furtherance to the settlement tendered between the petitioners and respondent Nos.5 to 9 in Clause (4) of
6
the said settlement, the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties have also declared that the interse merit while granting admission shall be considered and then only, the admission shall be granted.
7. In view of the above, we find that following order deserves to be passed:
1. The settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent Nos.5 to 9 are taken on record with modification of Clause-4 as referred in earlier paragraph and it would bind to the parties to the settlement. However we clarify that the settlement shall not be binding to any of the regulatory authority who are respondent Nos.1 to 4 which includes MCI.
2. We also clarify that the present settlement shall not operate prejudicial to the interest of any of the student who are not parties to the proceedings or who may be having
7
higher merit in comparison to the petitioners herein.
3. As we have clarified that the settlement would not be binding on respondent Nos.1 to 4 including MCI, we find that the order for deletion of MCI is not required. Petitions shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
JT/-
8
Alert