Allowed

Sri. Vijay Kumar Ravindra Mannur v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Dec 2023WP/28458/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 was filed by in-service candidates seeking admission to Post Basic B.Sc. Nursing quota. The High Court issued notice and direction to the Respondent to consider their representation regarding technical errors in application upload preventing them from selecting the in-service candidates category. The petition was allowed, directing correction of applications.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed. Respondent No. 3 is directed to consider the petitioners' representation and correct the applications within two days.

Sri. Vijay Kumar Ravindra Mannur Vs State of… — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 28458 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. VIJAY KUMAR RAVINDRA MANNUR S/O SRI RAVINDRA MANNUR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PLOT NO.30, OPPOSITE LITTLE CHAMPS SCHOOL, SHIGGAVI LAYOUT, MALASAMUDRA, GADAG - 582 103.

¶9

SMT. GRACY M JOHN, W/O SRI MOHANRAJ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT 4063/8/20CL, KABADI CHAWL HEALTH CAMP BETAGRI, BETAGERI (RURAL), GADAG BETAGERI GADAG - 582 102.

¶10

Digitally signed by R DEEPA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

SMT. JAYASHREE ARJUN DASHAVANT, D/O SRI ARJUN DASHAVANT, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, MAVINAHALLI MAVINAHALLI ALUR (INDI) BIJAPUR - 586 111 KARNATAKA.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. PRAMODHINI RANGANATH K R.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶17

DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

¶18

DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, BANGALORE MEDICAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, (OLD BUILDING) 1^ST FLOOR, FORT, K.R.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.

¶19

KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY, SAMPIGE ROAD, 18^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI. N.K. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER REQUESTS OF THE PETITIONERS AND CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS UNDER THE IN-SERVICE CANDIDATES CATEGORY AND IF ELIGIBLE ALLOT THE SEATS UNDER THE INSERVICE CANDIDATES CATEGORY, VIDE ANNEXURE-E, E1, E2, DTD 16/12/2023.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioners filed this writ of Mandamus seeking direction to the respondents to consider the requests of

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶27

the petitioners and consider the application of the petitioners under the in-service candidates category and if eligible, allot the seats under the in-service candidates category vide Annexures- E, E1, E2 dated 16.12.2023.

¶28

Brief facts leading rise to filing of this petition are as under:

¶29

The respondent No.2 has issued an information Bulletin for the academic year 2023-24 for admissions to the Post Basic B.Sc., Nursing course. The petitioners being the in-service candidates category, at the time of uploading the applications, no option was provided for inservice candidates. During extended period, the 'edit option' which was provided in the website did not save the applications that were edited to the category of in-service candidates. The petitioners have made representation to the respondent No.3 to make corrections in their applications and permit them to make option entry in the in-service candidates category. The respondent No.3 has not considered their applications nor permitted them to

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶32

make an option of entering under in-service candidates

¶33

category. Hence, this writ petition.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for respondents.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have submitted the applications as being the in-service candidates category. She submits that at the time of uploading the applications, no option was provided for the in-service candidates. The petitioners made a representation to the respondent No.3 to permit the petitioners to carryout the corrections in the applications, but the respondent No.3 has not considered the representation. Further, submits that the petitioners have obtained No Objection Certificate from the Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, Gadag. Hence, she submits in the facts and circumstances of the case, direction be issued to the respondent No.3 to permit the petitioners to carryout corrections in the applications. Hence, on these grounds, she prays to allow the writ petition.

¶36

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶37

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents

¶38

supports the action of the respondents. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶39

Perused the records and considered the

¶40

submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶41

The petitioners submitted an application for the course Basic B.Sc., Nursing course as an in-service candidates category, at the time of uploading the applications, no option was provided for the in-service candidates. During the extended period, 'edit option' which was provided on the website did not save the application that were edited to the category of in-service candidates, since the petitioners are working in a Government hospital. The petitioners are intending to pursue higher studies in B.Sc Nursing course as in-service candidates category. The petitioners submitted the applications for the course of basic B.Sc Nursing as a in-service candidates category. The petitioners have

¶42

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶43

obtained No objection certificate from the Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, Gadag, which is a mandatory requirement for obtaining the list under in-service candidates category. The petitioners while uploading applications could not enter under in-service candidates category. Later on the petitioners submitted an application to the respondent No.3 to permit the petitioners to make a corrections at the time of document verification. The respondent No.3 has not considered the representation submitted by the petitioners. If the representation submitted by the petitioner is not considered the petitioners will be loosing one year. Hence, considering the facts and circumstances, in order to protect the interest of the petitioners it is just and necessary to issue direction to the respondent No.3 to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of Annexure-F to F2.

¶44

¶45

NC: 2023:KHC:46111 WP No. 28458 of 2023

¶46

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

The writ petition is allowed.

¶49

Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioners vide Annexures-E, E1 and E2 and in the light of Annexures-F, F1 and F2, within a period of two days from today.

¶50

SKS

Sri. Vijay Kumar Ravindra Mannur v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Vijay Kumar Ravindra Mannur v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeeda Begum Vs Smt Saraswathamma

Sri Mahalinga Bhat Vs Giriyappa Gowda

Somashekar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S Rahul Vs the State of Karnataka

Bangalore Institution for Higher Education and Research Vs State of Karnataka

Ritnand Balved Education Fundation Vs State of Karnataka