EADHU KRISHNA K. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P15 notice dated 20.03.2013 issued by the 3rd respondent directing the 5th respondent to remove the petitioners from the roll of BHMS students in the 5th respondent college.

(2.) When this writ petition was filed, the petitioners were 1st year BHMS students in the 5th respondent college. They were granted admission from the rank list prepared by 2nd respondent for the year 2012. Petitioners allege that while the admission for the academic year 2012 was about to close, the 1st respondent informed the 4th respondent about the modalities of spot admission which had to be completed before 31.10.2012. Accordingly the 4th respondent scheduled spot admission to the 5th respondent college on 29.10.2012. According to the petitioner, by the last week of October, 2012 out of 50 seats for BHMS course, 5 seats were vacant in the 5th respondent college. On 29.10.2012, as scheduled certain candidates came forward opting spot admission and accordingly 3 were admitted. However the remaining two seats remain vacant. Petitioners alleged that respondents 2 and 4 could not make available any candidate. Hence those 2 seats were filled by the petitioners. The petitioners alleged that the candidature of the petitioners was agreed to by the 3rd respondent. However, of late, they started to issue queries which were duly replied. The petitioners point out that 2nd and 4th respondents were informed of the seats in which they were granted admission on 22.10.2012. However, there was no response. Petitioners, however, alleged that the 5th respondent college is a minority institution duly recognized by the Government. However, 3rd respondent asked the 5th respondent to remove the petitioners from the rolls before 31.03.2013 by this notice impugned. It is with this background the petitioners are come up before this Court.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, they contended as follows: As per Clause 16 of Direct Payment System agreement signed between the Management of Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College, Chottanikkara, Ernakulam and Government, they can admit only 15% of total strength for 2012 -13. They were allotted 7 sets and they can admit only 7 students in the management quota. The Principal has no authority to change the lapsed Government seats as Management seats and to fill the Government seats with Management candidates. Exhibit P6 is not validly issued. Exhibit P7 is only a list forwarded by the Principal in a form provided by 3rd respondent. Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College, Chottanikkara, Ernakulam is an institution managed by a minority community. Exhibit -P14 dated 28.03.1983 was later modified by G.O. No.184/2003/H&FWD dated 03.09.2003 (Exhibit -R1(a)) which was issued after the introduction of Direct Payment System in the institution. The Government Order clearly states that Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College management shall not make any claims as a minority community. So Government Order mentioned Exhibit -P14 has become invalid. The Principal, Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College, Chottanikkara, Ernakulam has conducted improper admission to lapsed Government seat in Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College, Chottanikkara, Ernakulam for BHMS course during the academic year 2012 -13. He was bound to inform the Principal and Controlling Officer i.e., in the 4th respondent of any vacancies existing in the institutions upto 29.10.2012. The Kerala University for Health and Science, on verification of records found out the improper admission conducted by the Principal, Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College, Chottanikkara, Ernakulam. Hence Exhibit -P15 was issued. Exhibit -P15 is a letter issued by the Registrar, Kerala University for Health and Science to the Principal, Dr.Padiar Memorial Homeopathic Medical College. There is no need to inform the petitioners the issuance of the letter as alleged by the petitioner. This is an official correspondence among the offices. Hence the question of violation of natural justice does not arise. Government cannot justify the improper admission conducted by Management for the 1st BHMS 2012 -13. It is the prime duty of the Government to render justice to the eligible candidates.