Dismissed

S.Dinesh Kumar (Minor), Ar No. v. The Secretary

Madras HC17 Sept 2018WP/35438/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking admission to an MBBS course for the academic year 2016-2017. The court found the petition infructuous based on the petitioner's counsel's submission and consequently closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

None granted. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

S.Dinesh Kumar (Minor), Ar No. Vs The Secretary — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.09.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN

¶5

W.P.No.35438 of 2016 and W.P.M.P.No.30500 of 2016

¶6

S.Dinesh Kumar (Minor) Rep. by his father S.Selvamani (natural guardian) ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2. The Medical Council of India, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwaraka – Phase – I, New Delhi – 110077. 3. The Director, Directorate of Medical Education, 162, EVR Salai, Kilpauk, Chennai-10. 4. The Secretary, Selection Committee, Directorate of Medical Education, 162, EVR Salai, Kilapauk, Chennai – 10. 5. The Director General of Health Services, New Delhi, Room No.444A, Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi – 110 001. R5 is suo motu impleaded as per order dated 23.03.2017 in WP.No.35438 of 2016 ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the

¶7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶8

Respondents 1 to 3 to conduct detailed enquiry into the selection of candidates done by way of counseling conducted on 28.09.2016 for MBBS admission done for the academic year 20162017 and consequently direct the respondents to admit the petitioner in MBBS course for the Academic year 2016-2017 in any of the colleges within their control based on eligibility of the petitioner cutoff mark of 195.25, either by creating additional seat or by cancelling the entire selection done pursuant to the counseling held on 28.09.2016.

¶9

For Petitioner : Ms.G.V.Seetha Lakshmi

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.C.Munusamy, Special Government Pleader (for R1, R3 and R4) Mr.V.P.Raman (for R2) Mr.Venkatasamy Babu (for R5) O R D E R

¶11

(for R1, R3 and R4)

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that nothing survives in this Writ petition and it has become infructuous.

¶13

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶14

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶15

ay/sai

¶16

¶17

1.The Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

¶18

2.The Medical Council of India, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwaraka – Phase – I, New Delhi – 110077.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

3.The Director, Directorate of Medical Education, 162, EVR Salai, Kilpauk, Chennai-10.

¶21

4.The Secretary, Selection Committee, Directorate of Medical Education, 162, EVR Salai, Kilapauk, Chennai – 10. 5.The Director General of Health Services, New Delhi, Room No.444A, Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi – 110 001. +1cc to Mr.V.P.Raman, Advocate, S.R.No.64419 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.64560 W.P.No.35438 of 2016 CS/09/10/2018

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Dinesh Kumar (Minor), Ar No. v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Dinesh Kumar (Minor), Ar No. v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.K.Prasanna Venkatachalam Vs The Director of School

C.Yesu Nesan, Vs The Chairman Cum Managing

Joseph Jegan Vs The Assistant Director

Mr.Bakrudin Ali Ahmed, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Premavathy, W/o.Prakash, Vs The District Collector

D.Srinivasan Vs The Chairman