Karnataka Examination Authority Allotted MD Respiratory Seat 'Illegally': High Court Imposes Rs.1 Lakh Cost

The Karnataka High Court has imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on Karnataka Examination Authority after holding that allotment of MD in Respiratory Medicine seat made in favour of a candidate was wholly illegal.

A division bench of Chief Justice P S Dinesh Kumar and Justice T G Shivashankare Gowda allowed the petition filed by Dr. Rajesh Kumar D and set aside the order allotting seat to Pradeep Naik G and directed the KEA to allot the MD in Respiratory Medicine seat in favour of the petitioner and issue necessary orders in that behalf within two weeks.

Kumar is an in-service Doctor working as Assistant Surgeon in Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research. He appeared for NEET-PG 2021 held on 11.09.2021. Out of the total number of Government PG seats, 30% seats are reserved for in-service candidates, and out of them, 77% seats are for candidates working in the HFW Department, 12% seats for autonomous Institutions, 6% seats for BBMP and 5% seats for Boards & Corporations.

He claimed a seat under the in-service category under SC quota working in an Autonomous Institution. He was allotted MD in Respiratory Medicine in Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Chest Diseases in first round counselling on 02.02.2022. He got admitted in the said course.

However, on 02.03.2022, the KEA sent a copy of a letter dated 25.02.2022 written by DME, through WhatsApp calling upon the Executive Director, KEA, to cancel the petitioner's seat.

It was argued that DME's instruction to the KEA to cancel the seat without issuing notice and hearing petitioner is violative of principles of natural justice. The NOC was issued by the Jayadeva Institute and the same was accepted by the KEA. Petitioner said it was the duty of Jayadeva Institute to forward the petitioner's name in the list of in-service quota. Thus the cancellation ordered by the Director of Medical Education without recording any reason is illegal, it was contended.

The KEA opposed the plea saying that petitioner has been allotted a seat under in-service quota. At the time of document verification, petitioner had stated that he would submit the NOC, however, he did not submit the same though petitioner was given enough opportunity. All candidates have been allotted seats strictly in accordance with their ranking, it was submitted.

On going through the records the bench noted that the KEA through WhatsApp shared a copy of a letter written by DME to the KEA dated 25.02.2022. By the said letter, the DME has called upon the KEA to cancel the petitioner's seat. The said seat was not shown in the second round of counselling but allotted to the sixth respondent.

Then it perused the document verification slip issued by the KEA and said “Admittedly, petitioner was admitted on 02.02.2022. He has remitted the fees and attended classes. It is very relevant to record that Ms. Rakshita, learned Advocate for the Jayadeva Institute categorically stated that the Institute stands by the NOC issued to petitioner.”

Accordingly it rejected the contention of KEA stating that the verification of the genuineness and correctness of the documents must be completed at the verification stage itself. "Once the Verifying Officer has acknowledged that NOC has been submitted and testified the verification slip, it is presumed that all documents submitted were in order. If the NOC was for DNB Course and not for the MD Course, the KEA ought to have rejected petitioner's candidature at that stage itself. Even if it is assumed that the NOC was found defective at a later stage, the KEA ought to have obtained a clarification from Jayadeva Institute,” it said.

Court said it is regrettable that a High Officer of the rank of DME has chosen to direct cancellation of petitioner's seat without following any standard official procedure and without issuing any notice.

Referring to Rules for selection and admission to PG medical courses issued vide notification dated 23-11-2023, the court held “In the instant case, petitioner's seat has been cancelled without giving any reasonable opportunity and it is contrary to the Rule extracted above. Surprisingly, the seat was not shown available in the next round, but it was allotted to the sixth respondent. The KEA has failed to demonstrate as to how the seat was allotted to the sixth respondent in the second round of counselling without there being any seat available.”

Rejecting the contention of KEA and the 6th respondent that even if allotment in favour of sixth respondent is held to be bad in law, the same cannot inure to the benefit of the petitioner because the sixth respondent had already completed one year of the course, Court said “This argument is to be noted only to be rejected because, the collective stand of the KEA and the sixth respondent is to defeat petitioner's claim and to cover up the mis-management and illegal allotment to sixth respondent.”

It added “Therefore, we are of the opinion that the unilateral cancelling of seat allotted to petitioner and allotment of the seat in favour of the sixth respondent are bad in law.”

Accordingly it allowed the petition and directed that out of the cost to be payable Rs 50,000 be paid to the petitioner and Rs 50,000 to the Registry of the High Court.

Appearance: Advocate Akkamahadevi Hiremath for Petitioner.

AGA Sudev Hegde, for State.

Advocate N.K. Ramesh for the KEA

Advocate N. Ketty, for NMC.

Advocate Rakshitha D.J, for R5

Advocate Mukkannappa, for R6.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

Case Title: Dr Rajesh Kumar D AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 7951 OF 2022

Click Here To Read/Download Order