IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.18684/2019(EDN-MED-ADM) BETWEEN:
DR. MANASVI. M AGED ABOUT 26 YERAS D/O N. MAHADEVAN R/AT NO.78, 14TH B MAIN MAHALAKSHMIPURAM 2ND STAGE 2ND PHASE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD BENGALURU-560086.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJOY KUMAR PATIL, ADV.) AND 1. THE KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU-560012 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU-560012 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT (MEDICAL EDUCATION) VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.K.RAMESH, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2, SRI. SHIVA PRABHU S HIREMATH, AGA. FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR ADMISSION TO POST GRADUATE MEDICAL COURSES IN KARNATAKA UNDER NRI WARD CATEGORY AND ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO KEA AND PERMIT HER TO CHOOSE THE OPTION ENTRY UNDER NRI WARD CATEGORY IN PGET- 2019 AT THE TIME OF 2ND ROUND ONLINE COUNSELING BEING CONDUCTED BY KEA FOR ADMISSION TO POST GRADUATE MEDICAL COURSES IN KARNATAKA FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2019-20 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER AT ANNEXURE-K DATED:20.04.2019 AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS THEREON.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Though this writ petition is listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally.
2. Petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents more particularly to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider her case for admission to Post Graduate Medical Course in Karnataka under NRI Ward Category by accepting the documents submitted by her to the Karnataka Examinations Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “Authority” for the sake of brevity) and permit her to choose the seat available under NRI Ward Category at the time of 2nd round online counseling for PGET conducted by the authority for admission to Post Graduate Medical Courses in Karnataka for the academic year 2019-20.
3. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that petitioner has completed her MBBS degree from M.S.Ramaiah Medical College, which is affiliated to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS). She claims that she is eligible and qualified for the admission to the Post Graduate Medical Courses in Karnataka and that the authority had issued Notification dated 14.3.2019 for conducting PGET 2019 Centralized and Combined Counseling for Admission to Post Graduate Medical and Dental Courses in Karnataka for the academic year 2019-
20. According to the petitioner, she has qualified in National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test Post Graduate-2019 (hereinafter referred to as “NEET PG-2019” for the sake of brevity) and she is eligible for admission to Post Graduate Medical Courses. As per the Notification, she submitted her online application for PGET to the authority. While submitting her application, in respect of column “Are you ward of NRI ?”, the answer entered is “No”. According to the petitioner she was under an impression that she could submit NRI documents and claim NRI Ward Category status at a later stage. The petitioner attended the document verification conducted by the authority on 27.3.2019 and she was informed that unless she submits the relevant documents required to claim NRI Ward Category, she could not be considered in the said status. The first round of counseling was conducted by the authority on 25.3.2019. The petitioner participated in the said online counseling, but she was not successful in getting the seat. Thereafter, she made a representation as per Annexure-K dated 20.4.2019 to the authority requesting them to consider her admission in NRI quota and to update her status as NRI under the NRI Ward Category. The grievance of the petitioner is that the same has not yet been considered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner while drawing our attention to various documents appended to the memorandum of writ petition, contended that there are many vacant seats available under NRI category. If the petitioner is considered under the NRI ward category, it would enable her to participate in the ongoing counseling which has commenced on 23.4.2019 and would end on 24.4.2019 at 10.00 a.m. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondent Nos.1 and 2-Authority to consider the case of the petitioner and that the petitioner is willing to appear before the respondent Nos.1 and 2 at any time stipulated by this Court and if the respondent-authority considers the documents submitted by the petitioner and permits the petitioner to choose the seat in the NRI Ward category ensuing counseling, justice would be done to her.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.3 would submit that the case of the petitioner could be considered in accordance with law. According to them, the petitioner did not claim NRI status in the first round of counseling and the petitioner is seeking such status in the second round of counseling and therefore, no direction may be issued to consider her case in the NRI ward category. They also drew our attention to page 10 of the brochure wherein it has been categorically mentioned that the authority would not entertain any request for change of category or status of the candidate and that the petitioner cannot seek a change in the status at a belated point of time after participating in the counseling in first round in Non-NRI ward category.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, we find that ends of justice would be met in the instance case, if a direction is issued to the respondent Nos.1 and 2-Authority to consider the case of the petitioner having regard to the representation made by her on 20.4.2019 as per Annexure-K in accordance with law.
7. Since, learned counsel for the petitioner has expressed urgency in the matter, respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioner at the earliest.
8. For that purpose, petitioner shall appear before the respondent Nos.1 or 2 at 4.00 p.m. today itself, along with requisite documents.
9. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall consider the case of the petitioner as per her representation at Annexure-K dated 20.4.2019 and dispose of the said representation in accordance with law.
10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE DM/-
Sd/- JUDGE