High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 08 MAD CK 0369

S. Mala Rep. by Father and Guardian, R. Sivanu vs The Secretary to Government Department of Health, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-600009, The Director of Medical Education, 162, Periyaar E.V.R. Highway Road, Keelpauk, Chennai-600010 and The Secretary, Selection Committee, 162, Periyar E.V.R. Highway Road, Keelpauk, Chennai-60001

Madras High Court · Decided on 8 August 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vinod K. Sharma, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (MD) No. 5773 of 2007

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 · 282 words

Honourable Mr. Justice Vinod K. Sharma

1.

The Petitioner has approached this Court, with a prayer for issuance of a writ, in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the respondents to relax the minimum age limit, prescribed for admission to M.B.B.S course for the academic year 2007-2008.

2.

It is not in dispute, that the Petitioner was not eligible for admission, as per the provisions, in the Prospectus, as she was under age by 27 days.

3.

This Court on 17th July 2007, passed the following orders:

Interim Direction as prayed for the Petitioner is granted, directing the 3rd Respondent to include the name of the Petitioner in the rank list and allowed her to attend the counseling for admission to M.B.B.S. Course for 2007-2008 pending disposal of the above writ petition.

4.

In pursuance to the interim order passed by this Court, the Petitioner attended the counseling. However, she was not admitted to the course, being ineligible for admission. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is not in a position to state, as to whether the Petitioner was admitted or not.

5.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of, by observing that in case, pursuance to the interim order of this Court, the Petitioner was admitted to the course and has already under-gone the course for four years now, she may be allowed to continue as a special case.

6.

However, in case, her candidature was rejected, then no fault can be found with such rejection, as it is settled law, that prospectus has a force of law, which is binding on the candidate, as well as authorities.

7.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.