Telangana Medical College told to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to MS surgery Candidate

Ordering so, the bench comprising Honourable Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta observed that one seat in the MS (General Surgery) course from the Management Quota of the medical college for the next academic year (2021-22) shall be granted to the complainant medico. It also held that the directions issued in S. Krishna Sradha case can be made applicable to admission to Post Graduate Courses as well

In this instant case, the medico had submitted in per petition that she had scored 327 marks in the NEET PG 2020. During PG Medical counselling, she was given provisional admission to the MS (General Surgery) course and was allotted to Kamineni Academy of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad under Management Quota. Then, she was asked to report before the college on July 29 or 30, by 4 pm, the latter being the last date for admission.

According to the PG medical aspirant, she approached the medical College along with her father those days for submission of certificates and payment of tuition fees as well as college fees. In spite of her presence in College, the admission was not completed.

In the meanwhile, the last date for admission into PG Medical Courses was extended till 30.08.2020 pursuant to the directions of the apex court. Although she made an attempt to meet the Chairman of the College on 07.08.2020, she was not permitted to meet him. Later another candidate, who was below her in the merit list was granted admission.

Having left with no other alternative, the medico filed a Writ Petition with the HC seeking a declaration that denial of admission to her in the PG Medical Course for the academic year 2020-2021, as illegal. The High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the National Medical Commission ( erstwhile Medical Council of India) to create or sanction one seat in MS (General Surgery). A further direction was given to Kamineni Academy of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad to grant admission to her in PG medical course.

Challenging this order, the NMC then approached the apex court arguing that the direction given for the creation of a seat is contrary to the law laid down by SC.

The apex court, keeping in view of all the submissions and contentions, agreed with the High Court that the college was indeed at fault for not having completed the admission procedure as per the regulations. It said that the manner in which the College acted in depriving admission to the medico and giving admission to another aspirant on 11.08.2020 is deplorable, "The Managements of the Medical Colleges are not expected to indulge in such illegalities in making admissions to Medical Courses."

However, on the issue of whether the High Court was right in directing the creation of a seat for this academic year for granting admission the bench then observed,

"It has been repeatedly held by this Court that directions cannot be issued for increasing annual intake capacity and to create seats. The annual intake capacity is fixed by the Medical Council of India (now National Medical Commission) which has to be strictly adhered. Admissions to Medical Colleges cannot be permitted to be made beyond the sanctioned annual intake capacity of a medical college as has been repeatedly held by this Court."

Moreover, on the contention that whether the complainant medico can be left high and dry in spite of having suffered due to the illegal action of the medical college in denying admission to her, the bench found force in the argument of the counsel appearing on behalf of the medico wherein he stated that that there is no reason why the logic behind the judgment in S. Krishna Sradha case (supra) should not be made applicable to Post Graduate Courses.

"This Court was only dealing with the admission to the MBBS Course for which reason directions given in the said judgment were restricted to the MBBS Course. Directions issued in S. Krishna Sradha case can be made applicable to admission to Post Graduate Courses as well."

Following are the directions issued in S. Krishna Sradha case by the apex court:

i) That in a case where candidate/student has approached the court at the earliest and without any delay and that the question is with respect to the admission in medical course all the efforts shall be made by the concerned court to dispose of the proceedings by giving priority and at the earliest.

(ii) Under exceptional circumstances, if the court finds that there is no fault attributable to the candidate and the candidate has pursued his/her legal right expeditiously without any delay and there is fault only on the part of the authorities and/or there is apparent breach of rules and regulations as well as related principles in the process of grant of admission which would violate the right of equality and equal treatment to the competing candidates and if the time schedule prescribed - 30th September, is over, to do the complete justice, the Court under exceptional circumstances and in rarest of rare cases direct the admission in the same year by directing to increase the seats, however, it should not be more than one or two seats and such admissions can be ordered within reasonable time, i.e., within one month from 30th September, i.e., cut off date and under no circumstances, the Court shall order any Admission in the same year beyond 30th October. However, it is observed that such relief can be granted only in exceptional circumstances and in the rarest of rare cases. In case of such an eventuality, the Court may also pass an order cancelling the admission given to a candidate who is at the bottom of the merit list of the category who, if the admission would have been given to a more meritorious candidate who has been denied admission illegally, would not have got the admission, if the Court deems it fit and proper, however, after giving an opportunity of hearing to a student whose admission is sought to be cancelled.

(iii) In case the Court is of the opinion that no relief of admission can be granted to such a candidate in the very academic year and wherever it finds that the action of the authorities has been arbitrary and in breach of the rules and regulations or the prospectus affecting the rights of the students and that a candidate is found to be meritorious and such candidate/student has approached the court at the earliest and without any delay, the court can mould the relief and direct the admission to be granted to such a candidate in the next academic year by issuing appropriate directions by directing to increase in the number of seats as may be considered appropriate in the case and in case of such an eventuality and if it is found that the management was at fault and wrongly denied the admission to the meritorious candidate, in that case, the Court may direct to reduce the number of seats in the management quota of that year, meaning thereby the student/students who was/were denied admission illegally to be accommodated in the next academic year out of the seats allotted in the management quota.

(iv) Grant of the compensation could be an additional remedy but not a substitute for restitutional remedies. Therefore, in an appropriate case the Court may award the compensation to such a meritorious candidate who for no fault of his/her has to lose one full academic year and who could not be granted any relief of admission in the same academic year.

Ultimately, granting relief to the PG medical aspirant keeping in view of the regulations, the bench ruled that as the last date for admissions for the present academic year is 30.08.2020, it is not inclined to grant admission to her for this academic year by cancelling admission granted to another candidate.

Disposing off the petition, the Supreme Court bench observed:

Though we disapprove the practice of Respondent No.2-College in picking up students for granting admission without following the merit list, we do not seek to disturb the admission granted to Respondent No.5 (another candidate). Respondent No.2-College adopted unfair means to deprive Respondent No.1 (complainant medico)admission to PG course. Respondent No.1 has lost one precious academic year for no fault of hers for which she has to be compensated by way of an amount of Rs.10 Lakhs to be paid by Respondent No.2- College within a period of four weeks from today. Furthermore, Respondent No.1 is entitled for admission to the MS (General Surgery) course in the next academic year 2021-22 and shall be given admission in a seat allocated to Respondent No.2-College. In other words, one seat in MS (General Surgery) course from the Management Quota of Respondent No.2-College for the next academic year (2021-22) shall be granted to Respondent No.