High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 07 KL CK 0037

Chairman, Quilon Medical Trust, Mylapora, Thattamala P.O., Kollam 691020 vs Kerala University Of Health Sciences

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 July 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Devan Ramachandran, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 19507 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 677 words

Devan Ramachandran, J

1.

The petitioner is stated to be an Educational Agency, which has already established  a  Medical College  and  they  say  that they  want  to  add  a  Dental  Department  to  it. They say that, for this purpose, they approached the Government of Kerala and obtained  Ext.P2 Essentiality  Certificate as per the  applicable Regulations, but  that  they have been  refused  permission  even  to  access  the Internet Portal University, thus prejudice.

2.

Sri.Kurian learned Senior by the 1' respondent - being put to irreparable George Kannanthanam, Counsel, instructed by  Sri.P.M.Saneer - learned counsel for the petitioner,  explained  that since his client  has already  obtained  the  Essentiality  Certificate  from the Government, it is their right to make an application before the University for starting a BDS  course, though conceding that a final  decision  in  this  regard  will  certainly have  to  be  taken  by  them,  subject  to  the germane aspects covering the field. He, however,  contended  that  the  law  has  now  been well  settled  in  Ext.P5  judgment  of  a  learned Division  Bench  of  this  Court  which,  according to  him,  declares  that  no  application  can  be rejected  by the University at the threshold or refused  to  be  accepted by  them.

3.

The  learned  Senior  Counsel  thus prayed that  the l'  respondent  -  University  be  directed to  open  the  Internet  Portal,  to  enable  his client to  make the application for  the "consent to  affiliation",  so that the  further processes under  the  applicable  Statutes  and  Regulations can  be  taken  forward.

4.

Sri.P.Sreekumar learned Standing Counsel appearing  for  the 1' respondent - University, on the contrary, submitted  that, as has  been  averred by his  client  in  the  counter pleadings  in  this  case,  the  dental  seats  in Kerala are  far  in excess  to  demand even  as  of today  and  that  many  colleges  have  been  unable to  fill  up  their  full  quota. He  then  pointed out that  there are colleges  which  have  not  been  able  to  even  attract 50%  of  their  sanctioned seats and  that this creates a deleterious consequence, putting the entire Dental Education itself in  peril.  He submitted  that it is, therefore, that the University decided not to  accept  any more  applications.

5.

I  must  say  that  I  cannot  find  favour with  the  afore  submissions  of  Sri.P.Sreekumar because  there  cannot  be  a  complete  ban  in allowing  anybody  to  even  make  an  application, especially  when  because  the  final  decision  on such will  have  to be  taken by the University, depending  upon  all  the  relevant  aspects.  The fact  that  the  Government  of  Kerala  has  issued Ext.P2 Essentiality Certificate in which, justifying  the  reason  for  doing  so,  it  states clearly  that there is an "increase in  demand  of Dental  Surgeons  inside  and  outside  the  State (sic)",  I  cannot,  therefore,  find  any  reason why the  University  should take  a  stand of not even  allowing  anyone  to  make  an  application through  their  online  Portal.

6.

As  I  have  already  said  above,  it  is finally with the University to take a decision on how  the  applications will  have  to be  dealt with,  including  whether  it  is  required  to  be accepted  or  otherwise.

In  the  afore  circumstances,  I  order  this  writ petition to the limited extent of directing the 1St respondent to open the Internet Portal, so as to enable the  petitioner to  make  an  application  for  the  "consent  to affiliation"  which shall be done  within a period of 24 hours  from  the date of receipt of a  copy  of  this  judgment.  On  such  application being  received,  the  University  will  consider the  same,  including  as  to  whether  it  requires to  be  accepted  or  otherwise,  after  affording necessary  opportunity  of  being  heard  to  the authorised  officer of the petitioner; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary  action  thereon,  as  expeditiously  as is possible.

Needless  to  say,  since  I  have  not  entered into  the  rival  contentions  of  the  parties  including  as  to  the  educational  need  and  such other  which  governs  the  consideration  of  an  application  to  be  made  by  the  petitioner  I leave  all  of  them open  to  be  pursued by  them appropriately as and  when it becomes warranted in future.