SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Guj) 738

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HARSHA DEVANI, J.
NIDHI KISHANBHAI VASAVA - Petitioner
Versus
DEAN-GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY & 2 - Respondents
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10381 of 2014
Decided on: 06/08/2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
MR RITURAJ M MEENA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. NIYATI K JUTHANI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1-3

The main legal point established is that a college cannot retain a student's original documents without a rule or regulation in this regard.

Headnote:

Original Documents - Admission Discontinuation - Rule-R11 - The court discussed the right of the college to retain original documents and the requirement of payment of fees for the remaining terms. It referred to the decision of the Supreme Court and the Fee Regulatory Committee's conditions, concluding that the college cannot retain the original documents without a rule or regulation in this regard.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a student of first year M.B.B.S Course, decided to discontinue studies and requested the college to return her original documents. The college refused to return the documents without payment of fees for the remaining terms.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the college cannot retain the original documents without a rule or regulation in this regard and directed the college to return the original documents to the petitioner.

Issues: The main issue was whether the college had the right to retain the original documents and insist upon payment of fees for the remaining terms.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court and the Fee Regulatory Committee's conditions to conclude that the college cannot retain the original documents without a rule or regulation in this regard.

Final Decision: The petition succeeded, and the first respondent college was directed to return the original documents to the petitioner and treat her admission as cancelled.

JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Mr. D.M. Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. Though served, there is no appearance on behalf of the third respondent. However, having regard to the facts of the present case, it is not necessary to serve notice of rule on the third respondent. Considering the nature of the controversy involved in the present petition, which lies in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

2. The petitioner is a student of first year M.B.B.S Course at the Gujarat Medical Education & Research Society, Medical College, Gotri at Baroda. The said college is affiliated to the third respondent Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. The petitioner who belongs to the schedule tribe category was given admission in the year 2012. The petitioner had decided to pay her fees in two parts for the year 2012-13 by cash in respect of which she was issued bank receipts from Axis Bank of Rs.1,25,000/-in addition to Rs.15,000/-already paid as well as Rs.1,10,000/-which was paid two days thereafter. The petitioner was given provisional admission at GMERS Medical College, Gotri, Vadodara. After taking admission and pursuing the course, the petitioner could not clear the first year examination. The respondent-authorities asked the petitioner to continue with the course and try to clear the first year as a repeater. Since the petitioner could not cope up with the pressure of studies, she could not pass the examination of the first year. Under the circumstances, after failing in the first year examination repeatedly, the petitioner decided to give up studies in the medical course with a view to pursue some other field. She, therefore, requested the authorities to return her original documents like caste certificate, 12th standard mark-sheet, school leaving certificate and GUJCET mark-sheet. Despite repeated requests, since there was no response, the petitioner wrote a letter to the Dean of the College and asked him to return the original documents. Since there was no response thereto, the petitioner’s father wrote a letter to the Dean, requesting the authorities to do the needful. Since there was no response thereto, the petitioner’s father approached the higher authority and wrote a letter to the C.E.O, Gujarat Medical Education Research Society at Gandhinagar. However, despite all these efforts, since the original papers were not returned, the petitioner has approached this court seeking a direction to the respondent-authorities to return the original documents which are in the possession of the first respondent.

3. Ms. Niyati Juthani, learned advocate for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner despite two attempts at trying to clear the first year M.B.B.S., did not succeed and, hence, she has decided not to pursue the court any further and to take admission in some other course. However, the respondents are not returning the original documents which she needs for getting admission elsewhere and are not responding to any of the requests made by the petitioner. Reliance was placed upon the decision of this court in the case of Monil Prakashchandra Thakkar vs. State of Gujarat & Ors, rendered on 10.3.2014 in Special Civil Application No.18082 of 2013 wherein the court had, for the reasons recorded in the said order, directed the respondents to return the original documents to the petitioner therein.

4. On the other hand, Mr. D.M. Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, placed on record a copy of the minutes of meeting of the Governing Body of Gujarat Medical Education & Research Society, Gandhinagar held on 3rd July, 2014 and invited the attention of the court to the agenda item 4 thereof, whereby it has been resolved that M.B.B.S. students of N.R.I. and regular category who want to discontinue study, may be allowed to do so, however, such students are required























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top