IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2014

BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

WRIT PETITION Nos.13451-80 OF 2014 (EDN)

BETWEEN: 1. ANCY MOL.I D/O D.K.KOSHY AGED 26 YEARS KANDATHAL PUTHENVEEDU KOLLAM STATE

2. ANU DAVID D/O K.A.DAVID AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS KARUPPAMPADIL (H) ERNKULAM KERALA STATE

3. BINCY VARGHESE D/O VARGHESE K.C AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS BETHELE BHAVANAM PERUKULAM KERALA STATE

4. BIDIYA BABY D/O BABY - 2 -

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS SDA VADAVATHOOR KERALA STATE

5. BIJU T.F S/O FRANCIS T.K AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS # 12, 1 ST CROSS, PIRYA PATNA MYSORE, KARNATAKA

6. DEEPTHY GEORGE D/O GEORGE AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS PERUMBATTU KUZHIYARA KERALA STATE

7. DHANYAMOL D/O POHN APPAN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS MANUKUZHIL VADUVACHLIL WAYNAD KERALA STATE

8. DIVYA M J D/O JOSEPH M.J AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS MANUKUZHIL VADUVACHLIL WAYNAD KERALA STATE

9. DOKE SUVARNA RAMDASS - 3 -

D/O RAMDAS AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS 12, AZARA BAD PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

10.HEMALATHA G.S D/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 01, PATTAYBEDI, VVG DODDI RAMNAGAR, KARNATAKA

11.JIBI JOY D/O JOY VARGHESE AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS KOTTARATHIL PADEETTATHIL KARUVATTA ALAPUZHA, KERALA

12.JINCY GEORGE D/O GEORGE KUTTY AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS KURUVELI, THEKKATHIL VEEDU PERUMPUZHE KERALA STATE

13.JISHA ANCY D/O GEORGE AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 132, NEAR MANIPAL HOSPITAL BANGALORE-560017

14.LEEMA THOMAS D/O THOMAS C.A AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS - 4 -

#24, CHAKKISSERRY MALAYATOOR KERALA STATE

15.PRINCY PHILIP D/O PHILIP ABRAHAM AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RAMCHANNATTU PEZHUMPARA PATHANAM THITTA KERALA STATE

16.REIGINA S D/O MAJEETH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS MANCODE, VILAVACOD KANYAKUMARI DT TAMILNADU

17.REJI GEORGE D/O GEORGE K.C AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS KUNNATHUPURAYIDOM ELIKULAM KERALA STATE

18.REMYA THOMAS D/O K.P.THOMAS AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS # 12, MOOLACKATT VELIYANNOR KERALA STATE

19.RESHMA D/O K.R.RADHA KRISHNA NAIR - 5 -

AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS KIZHAKKE, KAVVUPADIL KOTTANAD THIRUVALLA KERALA STATE

20.SATHEESH.P S/O SUNDARAN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS #31, PUTHAN VEETHIL VARAVOOR KERALA

21.SHALINI.R D/O RAJENDRA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 205, BETHAMANGALA BANGARPET KOLAR DISTRICT KARNATAKA

22.SHIBY JOB D/O PYLO JOB AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS YALAMMAKATTUM, CMC 23, CHERTHALA KERALA STATE

23.SHINCY JOSE D/O JOSE AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS KUTTIKATTUKUNIL, CHARAL KERALA STATE

24.SHINTOMOL ALEX VETTOM - 6 -

D/O ALEXANDER M.VETTOM AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS VETTOM, PALA, KOTTAYAM KERALA STATE

25.SHOBIN GEORGE S/O T.GEORGE AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS SHOBIN VILLAKALAYAYAPURAM KERALA STATE

26.SHYMOL THOMAS D/O K.V.THOMAS AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS KANNAMATHARA (H) KIZHIPPILLY ERNAKULAM KERALA STATE

27.SINU T.PRASAD D/O SIVA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS THOPIL, KONGANDOOR KOTTAYAM KERALA STATE

28.SURYA JOHN D/O M.J.JOHN AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS MULLAKKARA, AYAMKUDY KOTTAYAM KERALA STATE

29.SURYA.L D/O DIVAKARAN ASARY - 7 -

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS KARAPPARAMBU, VEEDU VELLANAD KERALA STATE

30.THOMAS ANTONY S/O ANTONY JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS MULLACKAL, PALOORAKAVU KERALA …PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.SHASHIDHARA H.N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE REGISTRAR RAJIV GANDHI INIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES 4TH ‘T’ BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560041

2. THE PRINCIPAL LAKESIDE COLLEGE OF NURSING HORAMAVU BANASWADI BANGALORE-560041

3. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION VIDHANASOUDHA DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-56001

(AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER - 8 -

DATED:20.03.2014) … RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1) (SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPUR, HCGP FOR R2) (SRI.B.VEERAPPA, AGA FOR R3)

*****

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANN-A DATED:07.03.2014 AND ETC.,

THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

These petitions seek to question the denial of approval of admissions to the PB BSc (N) course. The background is as follows:

The petitioners are students of the second respondent college studying in PB BSc(Nursing) course for the academic year 2012-13. By a notification dated

23.05.2012 the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health

Sciences had issued admission calendar of events for - 9 -

the PB BSC(N) course for the academic year 2012-13.

The notification mandated that the Principals of colleges should submit online admission statement of the students admitted to their colleges, to the first respondent University between 05.10.2012 and

15.12.2012. Thereafter the hard copies of admission statements along with relevant documents in original were to be submitted to the first respondent by

18.12.2012 which date was thereafter extended to

31.12.2012. Though most colleges adhered to the calendar of events it transpires that the second respondent college had not submitted the necessary documents in terms of the notification and the reason assigned did not convince the University. The University was of the opinion that such non-compliance was a gross negation of academic discipline. However, it convened a meeting of the erring institutions, including the second respondent institution, on 14.08.2013 where - 10 -

it was indicated that any discrepancy found in the admission statements would result in the students’ admission not being approved. And the University provisionally permitted the students admitted to appear for the examination held from 21.08.2013 onwards.

But it was on a condition that the results of the examination of such students would be announced subject to the approval of the admission.

It is the case of the University that the institution had failed to comply with the directions and failed to submit the admission statements in time. Though documents were sought to be submitted belatedly the same was not taken into account since the University had already taken a decision not to approve the admissions of those students whose papers had not been submitted. Though the discrepancies, that were noticed by the University, having been subsequently - 11 -

corrected, the University had not approved the admissions of the students since the documents were not furnished in time. It is on a matter of principle that the University has refused to approve the admissions.

It is in this background that the petitioners are before this court.

It was certainly well within the discretion of the

University to deny the approval of admission as there is clearly a default on the part of the institutions. This, however, should not result in the career of the students being jeopardized. The need for adherence to the time schedules and to fall in line with measures to maintain discipline imposed by the University cannot be over looked and be permitted to be followed only in the breach. This has to be brought home to the respective institutions. Therefore, the institution ought to be appropriately penalized, as a reminder to prevent the institutions from repeating such indiscretion and laxity - 12 -

on their part. Accordingly, the second respondent institution is liable to pay a penalty of `.2,000/- (Rupees

Two Thousand only) for every student whose admission was pending approval on account of non-submission of the papers by the institutions. On payment of such fee, which shall not be passed on to the students by the institution, which shall exclusively bear the liability.

The first respondent University shall grant approval of admissions on such payment of penalty if everything is found to be in order. With this observation the petitions stand allowed.

The first respondent University is directed to approve the admission of the petitioners/students and announce the result immediately since the next examination is due on 08.04.2014 and hence the petitioners shall also be accommodated to take the supplementary examination if they have failed in any - 13 -

subject apart from the next year’s examination. If there is any default on the part of the institution in the future the University may take such stringent action as may be warranted in its discretion and it shall not be open to the institutions thereafter to approach this court in that regard.

Learned Government Advocate Sri B Veerappa is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.

SD/- JUDGE

ykl ct -rs