THANSEER K S S/O E KAMARUDHEEN AND E KAMARUDHEEN S/O ESMAIL PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA; KERALA PRIVATE MEDICAL COLLEGE AND CHAIRMAN, TRAVANCORE MEDICAL COLLEGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved is whether there is any scope for interference with the verdict passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition, whereby the time sought for by the Appellant to furnish the requisite Bank Guarantee, so as to have secured admission to the MBBS course in the management quota has been turned down.

(2.) The sequence of events as narrated in the pleadings reveals that the Appellant/Petitioner was an aspirant for selection to the post of MBBS Course, 2010. Pursuant to the verdict passed by this Court as well as the Supreme Court in the relevant cases, selection was conducted to a limited extent, so as to fill up the vacant seats in the management quota. Accordingly, a notification was issued and the candidates participated in the examination. In respect of the 13 seats available under the 3rd Respondent, the select list was published, wherein the Petitioner was shown at Sl. No. 7. All the candidates were given intimation on 20.10.2010 instructing them to satisfy necessary fees, the security deposit, Bank Guarantee etc and the candidates were given admission accordingly. The case of the Appellant is that, immediately on getting intimation as to the selection, the requisite documents were submitted before the concerned Bank so as to obtain Bank Guarantee; whereupon, the Petitioner was informed by the Bank on 23.10.2010 that a minimum period of 'one week' was necessary so as to provide the Bank guarantee, which in turn was intimated to the third Respondent seeking for a period of one week. This however was rejected by the third Respondent, who proceeded with further steps, which in turn was subjected to challenge in the Writ Petition.

(3.) After considering the facts and figures, the learned Single Judge observed that the 'cut off date' was clearly prescribed by the Apex Court while considering the matter and selection had to be finalized on or before the said date. In the said circumstances, interference was declined and the Writ Petition was dismissed, which made the Petitioner to approach this Court by filing this Writ Appeal.