K.T.G. College of Nursing, Run and Maintained by K.T.G. Education Trust and S. Premalatha vs The Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences and The State of Karnataka

N.K. Patil, J.—Petitioners in these petitions have sought for a mandamus, directing the first respondent to approve the admission of the 2nd petitioner as per Annexure-A and issue Hall Ticket and permit her to take up the Examinations of 1st year M.Sc. (N) Psychiatric for the academic year 2013-2014 beginning from 13th May 2014 and also direct the first respondent to conduct the lapsed Examinations.

I have heard learned Government Pleader appearing for Respondent No. 2 and gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of writ petitions carefully.

The grievance of the petitioners in these petitions is that, the first petitioner is having all the statutory clearance from Indian Nursing Council and the second petitioner is prosecuting her studies in M.Sc.(N) Psychiatric in the first petitioner-Institution. After fulfilling the eligibility criteria, the first petitioner submitted the admission papers of the second petitioner through Online Admission Student Information System (OASIS) to the first respondent on 16/08/2013 with payment of admission fees. The second petitioner completed one year of her studies and took up the Examination of I year M.Sc.(N) Psychiatric beginning with effect from 13-05-2014. In spite of that, the admission of the second petitioner has not been approved and on account of non approval of admission of the second petitioner, she has not been permitted to appear in the examination that commenced on 13-05-2014. Therefore, the petitioners are constrained to present these petitions, seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra.

After perusal of the grounds urged in the memorandum of writ petitions and after hearing the learned Government Pleader appearing for second respondent, it emerges that, it is the case of first petitioner that, having all the statutory clearance from the Indian Nursing Council, the first petitioner has admitted the second petitioner and she is prosecuting her I year course and she is eligible to appear in the examination scheduled to commence from 13-05-2014 as her admission papers have been forwarded online through OASIS, as referred above and the same has been duly acknowledged by the first respondent, but the admission of the second petitioner has not been approved and therefore they are constrained to come up before this Court, as stated supra.

In this regard, it is significant to note that, the prayer sought for by petitioners is to permit the second petitioner to take up examination scheduled to commence from 13-05-2014, by issuing hall ticket. But, the case has come up for consideration before this Court only today, i.e. on 15-05-2014, which means the said Examination has already commenced and is over. Therefore, the question of permitting the second petitioner to appear for the remaining examinations does not arise, without the approval of admission of second petitioner. It is further significant to note that no sincere efforts have been made by the first petitioner-Institution to verify regarding the approval of admission of second petitioner. Approaching this Court when the examination has already commenced is not justifiable nor the same is permissible and the prayer sought in the writ petitions is therefore, misconceived in nature and cannot be entertained.

It is further significant to note that, if the prayer sought in these petitions is considered and a direction is issued to respondents to permit the second petitioner to appear for the Examination, it would be very difficult for the said respondents to scrutinize the papers of second petitioner regarding approval of admission, at this eleventh hour and in such case, it would be further difficult to the respondents to allot the Centre of appearance of Examination for the second petitioner. Without making any arrangement, directing the first respondent to consider the case of second petitioner for approval and permit her to appear for the Examination, by issuing Hall Ticket, at this belated stage, is not justifiable.

Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration all the relevant aspects, I am of the opinion that the relief sought for by petitioners is misconceived in nature and cannot at all be entertained. Hence, the writ petitions filed by petitioners are dismissed as devoid of merits. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to redress their grievance before respondent Nos. 1 and 2, if they are so advised or need arises.

Learned Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance on behalf of respondent No. 2, within four weeks from today.