Hadiya Hamid Vs State of Karnataka

MISS. SSM TEJA KRISHNA SHREE AGED ABOUT MAJOR H.NO.6/4/12702, LASYA CLINIC MARUTI NAGAR ANANTHAPURAMU ANDHRA PRADESH-515 001. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18-7-2024)

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R-1; SRI N.K. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SMT. LATHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI N. KHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; R-5 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶33

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO DECLARE THAT, THE ADMISSIONS GRANTED TO PETITIONER NO.1 IS VALID AND, THAT SHE IS ENTITLED TO CONTINUATION TO HER STUDIES BY APPROVING HER ADMISSION FOR MBBS COURSE FOR THE YEAR

¶35

3 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:31348-DB WP No. 15019 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

2023-24. B) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO APPROVE THE ADMISSION FOR MBBS COURSE FOR THE YEAR 2023-24 OF PETITIONER NO.1 TO PETITIONER NO.2 COLLEGE AND ETC.

¶39

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶40

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and

¶41

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶44

Heard Sri. K.N. Phaneendra, learned Senior Counsel for Sri. Bipin Hegde, on behalf of the petitioners and Sri. Sudev Hegde, learned Addl. Government Advocate for respondent No.1 -State, Sri. N.K. Ramesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Karnataka Examination Authority, Smt. Latha Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.3-Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences and Sri. N. Khetty, for respondent No.4-The National Medical Commission, New Delhi.

¶45

Petitioner No.1 is the student, who has been admitted by the second petitioner for MBBS Course for the Academic Session 2023-2024. The petitioner, who had appeared in NEET examination with Roll No.2504010059 had secured the ranking

¶46

4 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:31348-DB WP No. 15019 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

at 787749. Though the petitioner had vested herself for counseling with Karnataka Examination Authority-2^nd respondent, because of her low ranking, she was not allotted any college for admission. One Miss. SSM Teja Krishna Shree, who was allotted the seat in the second petitioner college under the Management quota after taking admission through counseling conducted by KEA, complained to the authorities including Admission Overseeing Committee stating that the petitioner No.2 college was demanding fee of all four years together. Said complaint was investigated and the order dated 30.01.2024 was passed by the Admission Overseeing Committee imposing penalty of Rs.5.00 lakhs on the petitioner No.2 college and directing them to refund the entire fee taken from Miss. SSM Teja Krishna Shree. The said order of the Admission Overseeing Committee is under challenge in W.P.No.19384/2024, which has been disposed of by this Court by order dated 13.08.2025.

¶50

Shri N.K. Ramesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2Karnataka Examination Authority does not dispute the fact that petitioner No.1 was admitted by petitioner No.2 college under the Management quota after stray round of counseling got over and petitioner No.1 name was on the web portal of KEA.

¶51

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:31348-DB WP No. 15019 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

He further submits that so far as admission of petitioner No.1 is concerned, there appears to be no illegality, except the complaint filed by Miss. SSM Teja Krishna Shree before Admission Overseeing Committee.

¶54

Considering the fact that petitioner No.1 admission in MBBS Course for Academic Session 2023-2024 in the petitioner No.2 College is not illegal, we direct the University to regularize and approve the admission of first petitioner and allow her to appear in the ensuing examinations and pursue her further studies in the petitioner No.2 college.

¶55

Sri. N. Khetty, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4The National Medical Commission, New Delhi, also submits that respondent No.4 does not have any objection in approving and regularizing admission of the first petitioner by the Universityrespondent No.3.

¶56

Respondent No.3Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore is directed to regularize the admission of the first petitioner and allow her to undertake the ensuing examinations as well as further studies in the petitioner No.2 college.

¶57