Disposed

Dr.Sreedev T.S v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Aug 2022WP(C)/28358/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging salary continuity rules for sponsored candidates in DNB courses. Recognizing the matter requires an original application before the Administrative Tribunal, the court closed the present petition while reserving the petitioner's right to approach the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed without any grant of relief, reserving the petitioner's right to approach the Kerala Administrative Tribunal.

Dr.Sreedev T.S Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 28358 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DR.SREEDEV T.S
AGED 36 YEARS

¶8

S/O. SAMBASIVAN.T.V., ASSISTANT SURGEON (CMO) TALUK
HEADQUARTERS HOSPITAL, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
RESIDING AT THARAYIL HOUSE, MALIANKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-
683 516
BY ADV S.RAMESH

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

3 NATIONAL BORD OF EXAMINATIONS IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, MEDICAL ENCLAVE, MAHATMA GANDHI MARG ( RING ROAD), ANSARI NAGAR, NEW DELHI,PIN-110 029, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

¶13

4UNION OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, NEW DELHI,PIN-
110 001, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
BY ADVS.

¶14

GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.P.G.PRAMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.T.SANJAY, SC, NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATIONS IN
MEDICAL SCIENCES (NBEMS)
MANU S., ASG OF INDIA

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 28358 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 12^th day of August, 2022

¶20

The petitioner, while working as Assistant Surgeon at the Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Fort Kochi appeared for NEET P.G. 2021, with intention of securing admission for DNB course. Being a sponsored candidate, the petitioner had to upload his application along with a letter in Ext.P1 format. As per Clause 4 of the format the candidates shall continue to get their salary and necessary allowances as per rules from the parent department (Sponsoring Government Organization) for the entire period of DNB training. The writ petition is filed challenging Clause 4.

¶21

2.By interim order dated 14.12.2021, respondents 1 and 2 were directed to upload the official letter in form of Ext.P1 and directed the 3^rd respondent to process the application once Ext.P1 is uploaded.

¶22

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the interim order, the petitioner’s application and Ext.P1 format were uploaded and the petitioner secured admission for DNB course in the Madras Medical College. It is pointed out that the issue regarding the payment of salary while undergoing higher studies is covered by Rule 91 and 91(a) of Part of I KSR was

¶23

WP(C) NO. 28358 OF 2021

¶24

¶25

considered this Court in Mahesh V. State of Kerala [2011 (2) KLT 930]. That judgment was taken up in appeal by the Government, culminating in State of Kerala V. Mahesh [2012 (3) KLT 675], wherein the Division Bench held that candidates like the petitioners should execute a bond. Learned counsel points out that, despite such direction, the Government, by way of an amendment introduced in 2016, stipulated that sponsored candidates are eligible for only leave without allowance.

¶26

Learned counsel finally submitted that, being a person in Government service, the petitioner will have to challenge the amendment by filing an original application before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal.

¶27

In view of the said submission, the writ petition is closed, reserving the petitioner's right to approach the Kerala Administrative Tribunal.

¶28

Sd/V.G ARUN JUDGE

¶29

¶30

WP(C) NO. 28358 OF 2021

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28358/2021

¶33

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶34

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT
PUBLISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE
WEBSITE
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 11.11.2021
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30.11.2021
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
27.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE NOC DATED 30.11.2021
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF RULE
50 OF CENTRAL CIVIL SERVICES (LEAVE)
RULES,1972
Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE
INFORMATION BULLETIN FOR NBEMS DIPLOMA
COURSES WHICH PROVIDES FOR STIPEND
GUIDELINES

Dr.Sreedev T.S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Sreedev T.S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adv. a. M. Ariff Vs the Union of India

K.K.Sugathan Vs Punarjani Securities Limited

Dr.a.Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Ashraf Vs the Director, Kerala State It Mission and Akshaya

Cheerans Structurals, Vs Micro and Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Anu Babu Vs Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation