Back
2022 Supreme(Raj) 1594
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Ashok Kumar Gaur, J.
S.S. Tantia Medical College – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5787/2022
Decided On : 05-07-2022
Mr.Punit Singhvi, Adv. with Mr.Ayush Singh, Adv. & Mr.Swapnil S. Sharma, Advocate, for the Petitioner
Mr.Harshal Tholia, Adv. for Dr.V.B. Sharma, AAG, Mr.Angad Mirdha, Adv, for the Respondent
The court's decision emphasized compliance with court orders and the freedom of state authorities to take action under the law.
Headnote:
Jurisdiction - MBBS Seat Allotment - Compliance with Court Order
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-institution sought a direction to fill up a vacant MBBS seat due to non-reporting of a private candidate who was allotted the seat in the second round of counseling. The institution also sought permission to fill the vacant seat due to the alleged non-joining of the candidate in the MBBS course. The court passed an interim order permitting the institution to fill the vacant seat with certain conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the institution complied with the order by filling the vacant seat and submitting additional affidavits. The court also addressed the issue of jurisdiction raised by the respondents and left it open for future consideration.
Issues: The issues involved the filling of a vacant MBBS seat, compliance with the court order, and the jurisdiction of the court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court permitted the institution to fill the vacant seat with certain conditions, and it left the question of jurisdiction open for future consideration. The court also clarified that the state authorities were free to take action if they deemed it necessary under the law.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition accordingly.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Institution seeking a direction to fill up the vacant seat due to non-reporting of respondent No.4-private candidate, who was allotted MBBS seat in second round of counselling. The petitioner-
2. Institution also seeks additional prayer of permitting it to fill the vacant seat on account of alleged non-joining of respondent No.4 in the MBBS Course.
3. This Court on 12.04.2022 passed an interim order and recorded fact of withdrawal of resignation, said to be given by respondent No.4 and considering the fact of stray round being concluded on 12.04.2022 itself by 05:00 PM, this Court permitted the petitioner-Institution to undertake the exercise of filling up of one seat which was left vacant by the respondent No.4.
4. This Court additionally had put a condition on the petitioner-Institution to put the information of filling the vacant seat by giving proper notice to all the meritorious candidates to participate in the counselling of stray round and the same information was to be put on the notice board as well as on the Official Website.
5. This Court finds that during pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner-Institution has complied with the order passed by this Court and additional affidavit to the same effect has also been filed, whereby, documents have been placed on record to show that proper exercise was undertaken by the petitioner-Institution for allotting a seat to meritorious candidate on account of one seat remaining vacant.
6. This Court had asked learned counsel for the respondents-State to file reply.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents-State Mr.Harshal Tholia submitted that in the present case, there was a complaint by respondent No.4 against the petitioner-Institution of charging excess fee then the prescribed fee and incident relating to grievance of respondent No.4, was not isolated incident against the petitioner-Institution but similar complaints against the petitioner-Institution were received by them and as such, in para 7 of the reply, they have made reference of certain complaints received by them.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents-State Mr.Harshal Tholia submitted that the petitioner-Institution may not be given any liberty to fill up the seat as per their own choice by forcing the candidate to resign and then to charge excess fee.
9. Learned counsel also submitted that though interim order passed by this Court has been complied with by filling up the vacant seat(s), however, the State Authorities reserve their right to take action under law against the petitioner-Institution, if such complaints have been received by them.
10. Learned counsel Mr.Angad Mirdha appearing for the respondent National Medical Commission submitted that though interim order has been passed by this Court, however, this Court did not have territorial jurisdiction to exercise its power, as no part of cause of action had arisen in the Jaipur jurisdiction.
11. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner- Institution is situated at District Sriganganagar and even relief sought against private respondent shows that she is a resident of Bikaner.
12. This Court finds that the interim order dated 12.04.2022 was passed by this Court, considering the fact that stray round was to be concluded on the same day and as such, vacant seat was not to go waste and as such, this Court by putting certain conditions, permitted the petitioner-Institution to fill up the vacant seat. The additional affidavit filed by the petitioner- Institution also shows that proper exercise was undertaken by them to fill the vacant seat and as such, this Court does not deem it proper to now decide the matter on merits. The question of jurisdiction is also left open to be decided in appropriate case.
13. The submission of learned counsel for the respondent Mr.Harshal Tholia that the State Authorities may be permitted to take appropriate action against the petitioner-Institution for alleged violation of no
