VINODINI Vs. SECRETARY KARNATAKA MEDICAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ petitions, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs:

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that, they are students of fourth respondent Institution, studying MBBS. All the petitioners are meritorious students and have got medical seats through competitive examination. All the petitioners have appeared for the 4th year MBBS theory examination held in the month of December 2019. It is the further case of the petitioners that all the petitioners have also appeared for the practical examination. One Professor Dr. Sadashiv Patil, who is an internal examiner has demanded to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- from each students during the revision classes held at the fourth respondent Institution and he has also threatened the students that if they failed to give the money, they would fail in the practical examination of Surgery subject. Due to that fear, the petitioners have paid Rs.5,000/- each to the examiner i.e., Dr. Sadashiv Patil - respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 has not satisfied with Rs.5,000/- which is paid by each students. Once again, he demanded to pay some more amount. Since the petitioners have not paid the amount demanded by respondent No.5 - Dr. Sadashiv Patil, he has made to fail all the petitioners in the practical examination. Being aggrieved by this action of respondent No.5, the petitioners have given a representation to respondent No.3, University vide Annexure-J dated 29.01.2020, requesting to re-conduct the examination and also conduct an enquiry into the allegations made against respondent No.5. Since no action has been taken by the Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences - respondent No.3, the petitioners have approached this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended that all the petitioners are rank holders. For first, second and third year MBBS course, they are toppers in the class. Respondent No.5 - Dr. Sadashiv Patil, who is an internal examiner for the practical examination and who was also conducted revisional classes for fourth respondent Institution has demanded the money for passing the students in practical examination. In the first instance, the petitioners have paid Rs.5,000/- each to respondent No.5. Being not satisfied with the same, he has demanded some more amount. Since the petitioners have not paid the same, he has not given marks to the petitioners in the practical examination and made them to fail. Hence, the petitioners have given a representation to respondent No.3 - University vide Annexure-J to re-conduct the examination and also conduct an enquiry by the committee constituted by the third respondent as per the University Grants Commission (Redress of Grievances of students) Regulations, 2019 (hereafter referred to as 'Regulations, 2019'). Without constituting the committee as per the said regulations, the Institution has constituted a committee and submitted a report. This report is contrary to the Regulations, 2019. Therefore, he submits that the writ petitions may be allowed by directing the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners vide Annexure-J and to constitute a committee as per the Regulations, 2019.