Dismissed

Dr. M.D. Hasan Iqbal v. Kerala University of Health Services

Kerala HC24 Nov 2022WP(C)/9445/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a senior resident and assistant professor, sought a declaration that his super-speciality supplementary examinations were conducted improperly and demanded re-evaluation by a new examiner, alongside directions for the inspection of video footage and answer sheets. The court dismissed the petition, noting the lack of material evidence to substantiate claims of

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with costs in the absence of material evidence to substantiate allegations of examination irregularity or victimization.

Dr. M.D. Hasan Iqbal Vs Kerala University of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V THURSDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶3

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

DR. M.D. HASAN IQBAL,
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O MD ANSARI,
RESIDING AT FLAT NO.3B,
3RD FLOOR, ASTER SQUARE, ABOVE DDRC LAB,
MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695011,
WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF NEUROSURGERY,
SUPER SPECIALITY BLOCK, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE
HOSPITAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 011.
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.SIVASANKAR
SRI. A. JANI

¶6

RESPONDENT/S:

¶7

1KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SERVICES
REPRESENTED BY CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,
THRISSUR - 680 596.

¶8

2STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶9

3 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 011.

¶10

4 THE PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 011.

¶11

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶12

¶13

5THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT
NEUROSURGERY, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 011.

¶14

BY ADV SRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UTY. HEALTH AND
ALLIED SCIENCE

¶15

SMT ANIMA GP

¶16

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSION
ON24.11.2022,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHE
FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for issuance of declaration that the conduct and evaluation of Theory and Practical Examinations attended by the petitioner with respect to Medical Super Speciality Degree Supplementary Examinations (MCh. Neurosurgery) held in December 2017, by the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS) was not proper, and the same is liable to be re-evaluated by another examiner. He has also sought for issuance of directions to the authorities of the Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, to produce the answer sheets of the petitioner and also video clippings and all other materials available regarding the conduct of examinations and also to get the video footage inspected by an expert outside the State.

¶21

It is the case of the petitioner that he is a native of Bihar. While working as Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery at Govt. Medical College, Thrissur, he was selected for PG (Superspeciality Course in MCh. Neurosurgery) in the Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, under service quota. Thereafter, the petitioner was accommodated as Lecturer Trainee in the Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. On the strength of the above, the petitioner was rendering his duty as Lecturer Trainee in the

¶22

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶23

¶24

Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, and also as Senior Resident (Academic) for MCh. Neurosurgery. After completion of the course on 31.07.2017, the petitioner was posted as Assistant Professor in the Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner contends that respondents 4 and 5 used to behave in a very hostile manner towards him. On one occasion, he was also assaulted by one of his colleagues at the instance of the 5th respondent. He asserts that though he was prompt in attending to his duties, he was never permitted to sign on the attendance register. He states that he appeared for the written examination for super specialty MCh. Neurosurgery on 10.01.2018, and the practical examination was conducted on 24.01.2018. However, no spotter classes were carried out. Though numerous requests were made by the petitioner for leniency, the same was not considered. The petitioner states that finally, when the results were declared by the KUHS, he is shown to have failed the examinations. The assertion of the petitioner is that he had failed the examinations due to the illegalities perpetrated by respondents 4 and 5. It is on these assertions that this writ petition is filed seeking directions.

¶25

A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent, detailing the sequence of events. It is stated that though the petitioner had joined as MCh. Neurosurgery Trainee under the MES Quota in

¶26

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶27

¶28

August 2014, he was regularly absent. He had approached the Administrative Tribunal complaining that he was placed under unauthorized absence for an ostensive period. It is also stated that pursuant to the orders issued by the Administrative Tribunal, the Trainee accommodation granted to the petitioner was terminated, and he was posted as Assistant Professor of Neuro Surgery in Govt. Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. It is stated that though the date of completion of the course was 31.07.2017, it was extended till 29.08.2017 due to the attendance shortage accrued to the petitioner. It is further stated that an inquiry was conducted at the Principal level, and it was found that the petitioner requires psychiatric evaluation by a Medical Board. However, the petitioner refused to undergo a detailed evaluation. It is stated that the Enquiry Committee constituted on 03.09.2015 had recommended the petitioner be relieved from duties as a Doctor and Resident Trainee as per the Service Rules. The Committee had also recommended that the petitioner be ordered to undergo Psychiatric Evaluation. It is further stated that the petitioner never took any duty in the department from late 2014. It is stated that the Theory Examination papers written by the petitioner were evaluated by the examiners, and the results were passed on to the University. The practical examinations were properly conducted, and the adverse result can only be due to the lack of knowledge or poor performance

¶29

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶30

¶31

by the candidate. It is stated that the invigilators who had been present in the examination hall performed their duties properly. It is also stated that the examiners were fixed by the KUHS from a panel of examiners in their list, and the Chairman was informed. They have denied the assertion that the examinations were not conducted in a free and fair manner. It is also stated that the exams conducted were recorded using CCTV Cameras, and the original copy has been forwarded to the KUHS. They have denied all the assertions made in the writ petition.

¶32

I have heard Sri. T.V. Krishnan, the learned counsel appearing

¶33

for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶34

I have considered the submissions advanced.

¶35

Essentially, the contention of the petitioner herein is that the

¶36

Principal, as well as the Head of the Department of the Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, has victimized the petitioner herein and purposefully failed him in his exams. Though the petitioner asserts that the examinations conducted by the KUHS were not in a proper manner, there is absolutely no material before this Court to substantiate the contention of the petitioner. On the other hand, from the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, it appears that the petitioner was found wanting in his duties and kept himself

¶37

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶38

¶39

absent for a prolonged period of time. The inquiry conducted by the college authorities also reveals the irregular nature in which the petitioner performed his duties and responsibilities. Other than making unsubstantiated allegations that the conduct and evaluation of Theory and Practical Examinations attended by the petitioner with respect to Medical Super Speciality Degree Supplementary Examinations (MCh. Neurosurgery) held in December 2017, by the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS) was not proper, the petitioner has not been able to substantiate the reason for raising such a contention. I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has not made out any case for entrusting the papers with another evaluator. The petitioner has also not made out a case for the issuance of directions to produce the answer sheets of the petitioner and the video clippings to get the video footage inspected by an expert outside the State.

¶40

This writ petition will stand dismissed.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶43

avs

¶44

WP(C) NO. 9445 OF 2018

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9445/2018

¶47

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶48

`EXHIBIT P1.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEARING` `NO.B2/2077/2014/DME DATED 30.07.2014.`
`EXHIBIT P2.`	`THE TRUE COPY ORDER NO.F5/22119/14/DME DATED` `20.08.2014.`
`EXHIBIT P3.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING` `NO.E3/18455/2014/GMCT DATED 12.09.2014.`
`EXHIBIT P4.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.F5/30313/2017/DME DATED` `19.10.2017.`
`EXHIBIT P5.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ATTENDANCE` `REGISTER FROM OCTOBER 2015 TO APRIL 2017.`
`EXHIBIT P6.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OA` `NO.1080/2017 DATED 13.06.2017.`
`EXHIBIT P7.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHELLAN DATED 15.06.2017 FOR` `RS.20,700.`
`EXHIBIT P8.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION` `NO.21021/KUHS/EXAM-I/SUPERSPECIALITY (S)/2018 DATED` `17.11.2017.`
`EXHIBIT P9.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE ADMIT CARD (REG NO.142310008)` `FOR APPEARING IN THE MEDICAL SUPER SPECIALTY DEGREE` `SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATIONS (MCH NEUROSURGERY).`
`EXHIBIT P10.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF COURSE` `CONTENT OF MCH NEUROSURGERY SUPER SPECIALTY COURSE.`
`EXHIBIT P11.`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESULTS DECLARED BY THE KERALA` `UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES THRISSUR WITH RESPECT` `TO THE MEDICAL SUPER SPECIALTY DEGREE SUPPLEMENTARY` `EXAMINATIONS, JANUARY 2018, IN WHICH REG` `NO.142310008.`

Dr. M.D. Hasan Iqbal v. Kerala University of Health Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. M.D. Hasan Iqbal v. Kerala University of Health Services

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

Jayshy V.K. Vs State of Kerala

Hima P.S. Vs State of Kerala

Mini T.J., Vs State of Kerala

G. Maneesh Vs State of Kerala

Feby Binu Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Hamja Beegum S., Vs the State of Kerala