SIDHARTH SRITAM Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C) No. 10733 of 2009 has been filed by the Principal, KalingaInstitute of Medical Sciences (for short, 'the KIMS') and W.P. (C) Nos. 16444, 16445,16446, 16447, 16448 and 16449 of 2009 have been filed by six petitioners - students ofthe said institution, who have been asked to be discharged from the M.B.B.S. Course ,2008-09.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the case are that the six petitioners-students appeared inthe Orissa Joint Entrance Examination, 2008. Being selected to take admission inM.B.B.S. Course and being allotted the Medical College, i.e., the KIMS, they tookadmission in the said college and continued to study M.B.B.S. Course and were due toappear in the Ist Year M.B.B.S. Examination in the month of July, 2009, but were notpermitted by the Utkal University to appear in the said examination in view of the letterdated 23.3.2009 of the Medical Council of India (for short, 'the M.C.I.') addressed to thePrincipal, KIMS, copy of which was endorsed to the Registrar, Utkal University and theauthorities of the State. Be it mentioned here that by an interim order passed by this Court, the said sixpetitioners-students were permitted to appear in the Ist Year M.B.B.S. SecondSemester Examination, 2009 and thereafter, are continuing to prosecute the saidcourse.

(3.) THE Supreme Court rejected all the three pleas of the Government and reiteratedthe well-known preconditions for the operation of the doctrine of estoppel. It wasobserved that the Government is equally susceptible to the operation of the doctrine inwhatever area or field the promise is made - contractual, administrative or statutoryand the Supreme Court held as follows:-