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

2014 Supreme(MP) 1618

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sushil Kumar Gupta, Rajendra Menon, JJ.
Vikrant Chourasiya - Appellant
Vs.
State of M.P. - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 12778 of 2013
Decided On : 06-08-2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Aditya Sanghi
For the Respondent: K.S. Wadhwa, Shashank Verma

In the absence of statutory rules permitting the retention of original documents, an institute cannot illegally interfere with a student's right to possess their personal documents.

Headnote:

Original Documents - Admission Dispute - Pre-Medical Test, 2013, Islamic Academy of Education and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, AIR 2003 SC 3724 - The court discussed the dispute regarding the retention of original documents by the institute, citing the absence of statutory rules permitting such retention. It referenced the case of Islamic Academy of Education and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, highlighting the need for institutes to seek guarantees or securities from students to recover potential losses. The court allowed the petition, directing the institute to return the original documents to the petitioner.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought the return of original certificates and documents submitted for admission to a medical course in 2013, citing the institute's refusal to return them.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the institute had illegally retained the petitioner's documents without any legal authority, and directed the institute to return all the original documents to the petitioner.

Issues: Dispute over the retention of original documents by the medical institute, and the petitioner's right to possess the documents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the institute's claim of suffering monetary loss due to the petitioner leaving the course prematurely did not justify the retention of the documents, as there were no statutory rules permitting such action.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and directed the institute to return all the original documents to the petitioner, with the liberty for the institute to initiate proceedings for recovery of any alleged losses.

JUDGMENT :

Seeking a direction to the respondent No. 3 institute to return back all the original certificates and documents submitted by the petitioner at the time of seeking admission to the Course in the respondent No. 3 institute in the year 2013, this writ petition has been filed.

2. Petitioner claims to be a candidate belonging to the O.B.C. category. In pursuance to the rule framed, respondent No. 2 the Director in Medical Education Department conducted the Pre-Medical Test, 2013 for admission to various M.B.B.S. and B.D.S. courses in the Government and Private Medical Colleges. It seems that petitioner appeared in the examination and secured certain marks which places him at Serial No. 291 of the merit list.

3. The State Govt. conducted the counselling proceedings on 21.07.13 at Bhopal. However, it is the grievance of the petitioner that even though, seats were available and he could be allotted seat either in the Govt. Medical College or in the Private Medical College but he could not secure admission as the original Transfer Certificate and other documents were not available with him. It is said that in the year 2009, petitioner had sought admission for the B.D.S. course in the respondent No. 3 Aurbindo Institute of Medical Science, Indore. Petitioner continued with the course upto the year 2010 but left the course and started preparing for appearing and selection in the M. B. B. S course. It is said that when the petitioner took admission in the year 2009-10 in the Aurbindo Medical College and Research Centre at Indore for the B.D.S. course, he has deposited a fee of Rs. 1,87,800/- as fee for one session and now as his Transfer Certificate and other documents are not given, he seeks a mandamus to the respondent No. 3 through respondent No. 2 for returning the mark-sheet of Class-X, Class-XII, Migration Certificate, Gap Certificate and Character Certificate which was deposited by him in the institute in the year 2009 while seeking admission through counseling by the State Govt. for the B. D. S. course.

4. State Govt. represented by Shri Wadhwa submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 institute is an inter-se dispute and the State Govt. has no say in the matter. However, he admits that petitioner was admitted to the course and the seat was allotted to him in the Government counseling and deposit of the documents have been done in accordance with the schemes/rules formulated by the State Govt. for admission to professional medical institution.

5. Shri Shashank Verma submits that petitioner was admitted to the B.D.S. course which is a 5 1/2 years course but he has left the course within one year, as a result, the seat fell vacant, no admission was given to any other student, as a result the institute suffered monetary loss as the seat could not be filled up for 4 1/2 years. Accordingly, contending that the institute having suffered the loss and petitioner can be provided the mark-sheets and other documents only if this loss is compensated, respondent No. 3 resist the claim made by the petitioner.

6. Shri Shashank Verma invited our attention to certain observations made by the Supreme Court in para 8 of its judgment in the case of Islamic Academy of Education and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, AIR 2003 SC 3724 to support his contention.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the records, it is clear that petitioner took admission in the B.D.S. course after he was selected in the entrance examination conducted by the State Govt. through the Directorate of Medical Education. The petitioner deposited the fees and other documents in accordance with the rules and regulations formulated by the State Govt. through the department concerned and even the seat for the petitioner in the institute respondent No. 3 was allotted by the State Govt. Petitioner has deposited all the certificates in accordance with the requirement of rule and fees for one session Rs.










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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