IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI W.P. NOS.27999-28001 OF 2019 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN:
1. Deepu E.S. S/o.Erappa H.
Aged about 32 years Deepu Nilaya Vasudeva Reddy High School Chitradurga, Challakere Chitradurga-577 501 2. Manjunatha B. S/o.Bheemappa Aged about 39 years Maruthinagara Midigeshi Madhugiri Taluk Tumkur District-585 355 3. Guruprasad M. S/o.Majunath P. Aged about 25 years Vasavi College Straight Road CMC Colony, Vittalnagar Chalkere Chitradurga-577 501 (By Sri.Srikanth M.P., Adv.) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka By its Principal Secretary to Government Medical Education, Vikasa Soudha Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-560 001 … Petitioners 2. The Director Medical Education Anandarao Circle Gandhinagar Bangalore-560 009 3. Karnataka Nursing and Para Medical Regulating Authority No.5, New No.40/20A Lakshmi Complex, 1st Floor Opp. Vani Vilas Hospital Fort, Bangalore-560 002 By its Secretary 4. Karnataka Nursing and Para Medical Sciences Education (Regulation) Board Para Medical Board, Bangalore No.5, New No. 40/20A Lakshmi Complex, 1st Floor Opp. Vani Vilas Hospital Fort, Bangalore-560 002 By its Member Secretary ... Respondents (By Smt.Pramodhini Kishan, AGA for R-1 & R-2 Sri.Yogesh D.Naik, Adv. For R-3 & R-4) These Writ Petitions are filed under articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India praying to declare that the notification dated: 13.04.2018 is not binding on the petitioner students and other similarly placed students vide Annexure- Y passed by R-3 and etc.
These Petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group, this day, the court made the following:-
ORDER In the instant petitions, petitioners have sought for the following relief:
a) Declare that the Notification dated 13.04.2018 is not binding on the petitioner students and other similarly placed students vide Annexure – Y bearing No.PHB/17-18 passed by the respondent No.3.
b) Direct the respondents to conduct the examinations to the petitioner - students at their respective institutions or the respective Districts.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents on instructions submitted that prayer No(a) do not survive for consideration in view of the later development.
3. Insofar as prayer No.(b) is concerned petitioners have not approached the competent authority seeking for consideration of conducting examination to the petitioners-students at their respective Institutions or respective Districts. The petitioners cannot choose and seek a particular Institution or a District for writing examination, it is for the examiner to decide in which Institution or which District and other places. Petitioners have no legal right to seek particular centre, Institution or a respective place for writing the examination.
4. Accordingly, petitioners have not made out a case in support of prayer at (b). Hence, petitions dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE BS