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

2017 Supreme(Ker) 646

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
Shireen M.T. - Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented By Principal Secretary To Government, Health And Family Welfare Department - Respondent
WP(C).No. 1275 of 2017 (H)
Decided On : 20-02-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Sreekumar Senior Advocate, Manoj Ramaswamy & Sanjana R. Nair, Advocates
For the Respondent:C.S. Sheeja Senior Government Pleader, P. Sreekumar, S.C., Babu Karukapadath, Advocate

Headnote:

Contract Act 1872 - Section 23 - Contract with Student - Withholding of Certificates - Public Policy - Whether void agreement - Held, Agreements obtained by the College from the petitioners authorising them to withhold the certificates of the petitioners for payment of the amounts covered by the bonds, if any, executed by the petitioners, cannot be accepted as an approved social conduct and the same, in that sense, is unethical - Even assuming that the agreement/bond executed by the petitioners in favour of the College authorising them to withhold their certificates is not void for want of consideration, the same is void as opposed to public policy

JUDGMENT :

P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.

1. Petitioners have undergone and completed MBBS Course in a private self financing medical college in the State. Their grievance in this writ petition concerns the refusal of the College in issuing certificates which are required for their future studies, such as, Transfer Certificate, Conduct Certificate, Attempt Certificate etc and in not returning their Xth and XIIth standard original certificates collected at the time admission.

2. The petitioners are students admitted for the course in the College under the Government quota from the merit list prepared by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations in the academic year 2010-11. They have completed the course and the internship that followed the course during 2016. The prospectus published by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations for admission to MBBS Course during the relevant year contained a provision to the effect that the students who successfully complete the MBBS Course from Medical Colleges in the State are liable to serve in rural areas on completion of the MBBS Course in accordance with the provisions contained in the orders issued by the Government from time to time. According to the petitioners, there is no requirement which makes it obligatory for the students who have undergone MBBS Course under the Government quota in private self financing medical colleges to serve in rural areas at present and the certificates, which they are entitled to on completion of the MBBS Course as also the original certificates which have been collected from them at the time of admission to the course, are withheld by the College on the ground that they have not fulfilled their obligation to serve in rural areas as per the terms of the prospectus. The petitioners, therefore, seek directions to the College to issue the certificates which they are entitled to on completion of their MBBS Course and to return their original certificates which have been collected at the time of their admission to the course.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent, the Principal of the College. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the College is a member of the Kerala Private Medical College Management Association; that 50% of the MBBS seats in the member colleges of the said Association are being filled up from the merit list prepared by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations in terms of an agreement entered into by the State Government with the Association on 9.6.2010; that the State Government have, among others, permitted the member colleges of the Association to get service bonds from the students admitted under the Government quota in their respective colleges for a period not exceeding one year; that the petitioners along with their parents have executed service agreements/bonds in terms of the orders issued by the Government in this connection; that the petitioners have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.13 lakhs each, less the amount of tuition fee paid by them, by way of liquidated damages for breach the said service agreements/bonds; that the petitioners have, in terms of the service agreements/bonds executed by them, authorised and permitted the college to withhold their certificates until they fulfil their obligation under the service agreements/bonds or till they pay the amounts agreed to be paid in lieu of the same; that the petitioners have neither fulfilled their obligations under the service agreements/bonds executed by them nor paid the amount liable to be paid in terms of the agreements/bonds and that the certificates claimed by the petitioners are not issued/returned for the said reason.

4. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader as also the learned counsel for the third respondent.

5. The specific case of the petitioners is that they were not liable to serve the college on completion of their course and that therefore, their certificates cannot be withheld on that basis. I shall, th













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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

SupremeToday

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