Disposed

Dr.Amrutha K.Sadasivan v. the President, Board of Governors

Kerala HC20 Jan 2020WP(C)/1387/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dr. Amrutha K. Sadasivan filed a writ to direct the National Medical Commission to determine and decide on his representation submitted for either MD or DNB status within two months of the judgment date.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the Ext.P2 representation within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Dr.Amrutha K.Sadasivan Vs the President, Board of… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 30TH POUSHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.1387 OF 2020(W)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 DR.AMRUTHA K.SADASIVAN AGED 31 YEARS NAVAMI, NEAR LPS, CHITTAZHA, VATTAPPARA P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695028.

¶8

2 DR. ASHA K. SADASIVAN SAKETAM, VILLA NO.1, SKYLINE PALM MEADOWS, MUTTAMBALAM P. O., KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN - 686004.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.B.SATHIQ

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE PRESIDENT, BOARD OF GOVERNORS NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION (PREV. MCI), POCKET - 14, SECTOR - 8, DWARAKA PHASE - 1, NEW DELHI - 110077.

¶12

2 THE CHAIRMAN NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATIONS, MEDICAL ENCLAVE, ANSARI NAGAR, MAHATMA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI - 110029.

¶13

SRI.TITUS MANI VETTOM, SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.1387 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following prayer:

¶19

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and dispose of Exhibit-P2 representation within a time limit to be fixed by this Honourable court;”

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Medical Commission.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners has preferred Ext.P2 representation before the 1^st respondent and that the same is liable to be considered in accordance with law by the 1^st respondent.

¶22

The learned Standing Counsel submits that with regard to MD, it is for the 1^st respondent to take the decision, and in case of DNB, the 2^nd respondent has to consider the representation.

¶23

However, in view of the fact that the representation has been submitted before the 1^st respondent with copy to the 2^nd respondent, there will a direction to the 1^st respondent to take up, consider and pass

¶24

WP(C).No.1387 OF 2020

¶25

¶26

appropriate orders on Ext.P2 representation within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The views of the 2^nd respondent may also be ascertained and considered by the 1^st respondent while passing orders.

¶27

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

WP(C).No.1387 OF 2020

¶33

¶34

APPENDIX

¶35

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶36

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CURRICULUM COMPARING SYLLABUS GENERAL MEDICINE AND ANESTHESIOLOGY. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS DATED 24.12.2019.

¶37

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

Dr.Amrutha K.Sadasivan v. the President, Board of Governors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Amrutha K.Sadasivan v. the President, Board of Governors

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

A.Subhash, Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Heera Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Digin Varghese, Vs the Marriage Officer (Sub Registrar)

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, Vs Station House Officer

Ullattil Builders Vs the Divisional Railway Manager (Works)

Syam K.S, Vs State of Kerala