Karnataka Examinations Authority Cannot Withhold Students' Original Documents In Absence Of Enabling Rules: High Court

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that Karnataka Examinations Authority (KEA) cannot, in the absence of enabling rules, withhold the original documents of medical students who have participated in the second round of counselling and secured a seat and then desire to participate in the counselling process elsewhere in other states. A division bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice C M Joshi allowing the petition filed by Ankit Kumar and others, directed the Authority to consider their representations for return of original documents and return them forthwith. The petitioners had contended that in terms of Clause 4.2.4 of the University Grants Commission Notification of October 2018, there is an embargo on taking the certificates into institutional custody under any circumstance or pretext. However, the authority had opposed the plea saying that the surrender of seats has the effect of depriving the other deserving meritorious students an opportunity and any permission granted for returning of original documents would encourage the practice of surrendering of seats to the detriment of other meritorious students. Further, the embargo as pointed out in the notification of October, 2018 would not apply to KEA. Findings Firstly the bench noted that UGC Regulation refer to higher educational institutions and the retention of original certificates by them as also complaints regarding non-refund of fees. "However, what would apply to higher educational institutions would more so apply to the KEA. Unless there is a legal provision for withholding of original documents, the KEA also cannot withhold the documents.” Court said KEA has not shown any rule which provides that KEA could withhold the original records in the institutional custody. Dealing with the contention of the authority that such practice (as adopted by petitioners) would result in misuse of opportunities, the bench opined “In public interest, if it is so found appropriate, it is always open for the respondent - State and other authorities to take note of the same and formulate necessary executive/legislative procedure to take care of such practices, if there are certain loopholes being exploited for commercial gain.” Case Title: Ankit Kumar & others v. State of Karnataka & Others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.25783 OF 2022 Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 2 Date of Order: 27TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 Appearance: Senior Advocate K N Phanindra for Advocate Abhishek Malipatil for petitioners; Shilpa S Gogi, HCGP for R1 & R; Advocate K M Prakash for R3.Click Here To Read Order

Karnataka Examinations Authority Cannot Withhold Students' Original Documents In Absence Of Enabling Rules: High Court

Mustafa Plumber

Tags