Doctor seeks refund of Discontinuation Fee paid for SS course: HC rejects plea
Madurai: The Chennai High Court recently dismissed an appeal of a doctor for reimbursement of discontinuation fee which she had paid when she discontinued from a super-speciality course at Thanjavur Medical College.
The appellant doctor had filed a writ petition before the High Court Madurai bench, challenging a clause of the prospectus for a super-specialty course, which mandated payment of a discontinuation fee of Rs. 5,00,000 in case of withdrawal after admission.
According to a recent report by TOI, the doctor had completed MBBS in 2009 and subsequently completed her postgraduation in medicine in 2015. Following a notification published by the state government for admission as a non-service candidate for the super speciality course for the year 2016-17, the doctor applied for the same and was allotted the course at Thanjavur Medical College in 2016.
A condition was incorporated in the prospectus to the effect that in case of discontinuance of any candidature with respect to the course, a fee of Rs 5,00,000 should be paid. The medico in August 2016 discontinued the course and also paid the discontinuation fee.
It seemed as if the matter was laid to rest then and there. However, after 5 years, in 2021, the doctor filed a writ petition before HC Madurai bench in 2021 challenging the portion of the prospectus with respect to the discontinuation fee and also consequently sought to refund the fee paid by her.
The single bench on March 21, dismissed her petition. A division bench of justices M Duraiswamy and K Murali Shankar observed that on a perusal of the materials available on record, it could be seen that the request for refund was rejected by the authorities in 2017, however, the doctor chose to file the writ petition only in 2021.
It is a settled position that if a person is aggrieved over any order, the same should be challenged at the earliest point of time.
The judges further observed that the doctor had knowledge about the condition imposed in the prospectus while joining the super-speciality course. The court pointed out that having accepted the conditions, the appellant cannot turn around and subsequently, contend that the same cannot be applied to her case.
The judges observed that the single bench, by taking into consideration all these aspects, has rightly dismissed the writ petition. "We do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the single bench," said the judges while dismissing the appeal, reports TOI.
