AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shaji P. Chaly, J
The Review Petitions are filed seeking to review the common judgment dated 21.12.2020 in W.A. Nos. 1666 and 1668 of 2020.
The subject issue in the writ appeals were in relation to the non return of the documents submitted by the Review Petitioners at the time of admission of post graduate medical courses by the second respondent namely Dr. Somerwell Memorial CSI Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, since in the prospectus issued for the educational period in question, the Review Petitioners have executed a bond in favour of the college undertaking to serve the Medical College concerned for a period of one year.
The paramount contention raised in the Review Petition is that this Court while disposing of the writ appeals, relied upon Ext. R3(a) prospectus, which according to the Review Petitioners, was not applicable to self financing Medical Colleges. It is also pointed out that the findings rendered by this Court relying upon the prospectus was against the statement made by the learned Government Pleader before this Court that the prospectus issued by the State Government was not applicable to the self financing colleges.
However, in our considered opinion, the said ground raised in the Review Petition is not at all correct, because we have specifically recorded that the State Government has issued an approval order dated 02.03.2017 approving the prospectus for the academic year 2017-2018, which is binding on all the institutions, including Dr. Somerwell Memorial CSI Medical College, which is a self financing one.
In our considered opinion, the sole ground raised as above is absolutely on the basis of a misconception and the Review Petitioners did not have any case at all that the college in question has published any prospectus and it was accordingly that the provisions of the prospectus issued by the State Government was taken into account and the findings were rendered.
Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the Review Petitioners have not made out any ground of error apparent on the face of record or any other legal infirmities justifying review of the judgment in question.
Needless to say, Review Petitions fail and accordingly, they are dismissed.