Ranjita Pulikeshi Karamadi vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 523 Kant

                            1

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                         BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

           REVIEW PETITION NO.170 OF 2020

BETWEEN:
RANJITA PULIKESHI KARAMADI,
D/O PULIKESHI KARAMADI,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT FLAT NO.12, MALLIEGE APARTMENT,
4TH MAIN, 11TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE.
                                            ...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. HIREMATH AKKAMAHADEVI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND FAMILY WELFARE,
105, IST FLOOR,
SECRETARIAT BUILDING,
VIKASA SOUDHA,'SESHADRI ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY
SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 012.

3 . EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE
CORPORATION/COLLEGE
MEDICAL DIVISION-IV,
HQRS. OFFICE PANCHADEEP BHAVAN,
C.I.G. MARG, NEW DELHI-110002
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL

4 . THE EMLOYEES STATE INSURANCE
CORPORATION/COLLEGE
                               2

MEDICAL COLLEGE & PGIMSR, BANGALORE,
RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE.
REPRESENTED BY ITS DEAN,
RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-10

5 . KARNATAKA MEDICAL COUNCIL
70, 2ND FLOOR,
VAIDYAKEEYA BHAVANA,
K.R.ROAD, H.B. SAMAJA ROAD CORNER,
BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR

6 . RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH AND SCIENCES,
4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 041.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

7 . MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA,
POCKET 14, SECTOR 8, DWARKA PHASE-1,
NEW DELHI - 110 077.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
                                        ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)

     THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114
R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS IN THE WP NO.29823-29828/2018 (EDN-RES) A
COMMON ORDER IS PASSED AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME BE
PLEASED TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/02/2020, AND
HOLD THAT THE REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS ARE
LIABLE TO SERVE THE BOND FOR ONE YEAR SERVICE WHICH
HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY THEM, AND PARTICULARLY DELETE
THE OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS IN PARA 7D OF THE COMMON
JUDGMENT PASSED ON 22/08/2019 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WP NO. 29823-29828/2018(EDN) TO THE EXTENT IN
PRESUMES/MENTIONS THAT THE REVIEW PETITIONERS HAVE
EXECUTED A BOND FOR 3 YEARS, AND HOLDS THAT THE
PROVISIONS OF RULE 11 OF THE KARNATAKA SELECTION OF
CANDIDATES FOR ADMISSION TO GOVERNMENT SEATS IN
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS RULES, 2006,
ARE APPLICABLE TO THESE REVIEW PETITIONERS, AND
SUITABLY MODIFY THE JUDGMENT, IN THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE.
                                3

     THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

Review petitioner has a short grievance as to the

observations at page Nos.29 & 30 of the judgment in review

which in his view gives an impression that he is required to

serve three years under the Bond in question which he has

executed in terms of Rule 15 of 2006 Rules.

2. This review is structured on an impression that the

petitioner would be required to render a period of service in

excess of what is stipulated in the Bond given by him, under

the extant Rules.

3. Learned HCGP on request having accepted the

notice opposes the review petition, contending that

petitioner's assumption is wrong, and this court agrees with

the HCGP.

It hardly needs to be mentioned that period of service

required of the petitioner would be not longer than what is

stipulated in the Service Bond in question.

Review Petition is disposed off, with the above

clarification, costs having been made easy.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DS