PRIYA VERMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the special appeals, the question raised is about enforceability of condition of forfeiture of bond of Rs. 5 Lacs entered into by the appellants which provides that if they leave the course of MD/MS/Diploma of Medical Education, the bank guarantee of Rs. 5 Lacs will be forfeited. The writ petitions having been dismissed, the intra-court appeals have been preferred. The appellants were admitted in the post-graduation courses. Dr. Vishnu Sharma was admitted in MS (Surgery) course in 2010. He joined the course, Thereafter in 2011, after appearing in the Pre-PG examination again, he was admitted in MD, Radio Diagnosis. Dr. Niranjan Singh was admitted in MD, General Medicine in Medical College, Udaipur in 2010. He again appeared in the Pre-PG examination held in 2011 and was admitted in MD, General Medicine course in SMS Medical College, Jaipur. Dr. Beena Thada was admitted in MD, Anesthesia in 2010. In 2011, after Pre-PG examination, she was admitted in another course. Similarly, Dr. Dinesh Chand Gupta was admitted in 2009 in PG course and in 2010 he was admitted in another different PG course. Dr. Vivek Gupta was admitted in 2009 and in 2010, he was admitted in another course. Likewise, Dr. Priya Verma was admitted in 2010 and she changed it in 2011. Dr. Veena Sharma was admitted in 2009 and she changed the course in 2010. Dr. Rajesh Rawat took admission in PG course in 2010 and admitted in another course in 20.11.

(2.) The condition stipulated in the prospectus is in Para-7(e) to the effect that the successful candidates after first counseling will have to submit bank guarantee of Rs. 5 Lacs at the time of joining/reporting at allotted college so that he/she cannot forego or leave the course or seat. It was also stipulated that if he/she does, the bank guarantee will be forfeited. The condition in the prospectus was in pursuance to the decision taken in the meeting dated 22.10.2007 at the government level by a committee consisting of three members, viz. Chancellor of the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, its Registrar and Professor of Anatomy, Medical College, Jaipur. Various decisions were taken including taking bond of Rs. 5 Lacs which has been stipulated in the prospectus. The appellants-have joined the new courses and left the seats which were occupied by them earlier. They have availed the seat for one year. The seats in question which were occupied by the appellants are not available for fresh allotment to the next candidate and they have gone waste. As the appellants left the previous seats and joined the new seats, the said condition of bond was invoked. Hence, the writ petitions have been preferred.

(3.) The respondents have justified their action on the ground that in view of clear stipulation in the bond and the prospectus, forfeiture of Rs. 5 Lacs cannot be questioned. The seats will have to be kept vacant in entire duration of the course depriving the patients from services of efficient Doctors and at the same time, other eligible candidates had been deprived of undertaking the course on the seats in question. Since there is violation as the condition agreed to the amount has to be forfeited as stipulated in the bond.