Rajasthan University Of Health ... vs Dr. Neha Choudhary Daughter Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 7725 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

            D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 914/2021

1.    Rajasthan    University        Of     Health       Sciences,   Through
      Registrar, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
2.    Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health
      Sciences, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Appellants
                                 Versus
1.    Dr. Neha Choudhary Daughter Of Shri R.k. Choudhary,
      Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 3, High Court Colony,
      Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
2.    State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
      Department Of Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan,
      Jaipur.
3.    Principal And Controller, S.m.s. Medical College And
      Controller Of The Attached Hospitals Jaipur.
4.    Head Of The Department, P.s.m., S.m.s. Medical College,
      Jaipur.
                                                              ----Respondents

Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 921/2021 Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Through Its Controller Examination, 100, Kumbha Marg, Sector 11, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302033 By Email [email protected]

----Appellant Versus

1. Dr. Ravi Kabra Son Of Shri Murli Manohar Kabra, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 19 Saket Nagar Extension, Jhalawar (Raj.) Presently Residing At B-05 Resident Doctors Hostel Sms Medical College Hostel, Jln Marg, Sms Hospital, Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Sms Medical College, Jaipur.

----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 922/2021 Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Sector-8,

(2 of 3) [SAW-914/2021]

Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302033 Through Controller Of Examination.

----Appellant Versus

1. Dr. Chandra Prakash Sharma Son Of Shri Om Prakash Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Brij Vihar Colony, Khedli, Distt. Alwar Presently Studying In Rnt Medical College, Udaipur.

2. Rnt Medical College, Udaipur, Through Principal And Controller Of Examination.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ravi Chirania Mr. S.K. Poshwal Mr. Mukul Bhagtani For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashwini Chobisa Ms. Anita Agarwal

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

Judgment

16/12/2021

These appeals arise out of separate orders passed by the

learned Single Judge in respect of writ petitions but concern

similar issues. In so far as all appeals except DBSAW No.

922/2021 is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant

Rajasthan University of Health Sciences candidly stated that the

directions issued by the learned Single Judge in favour of

respective writ petitioners have already been worked out and

implemented. In that view of the matter, we see no reason to

reopen the issues which are already closed. However with respect

to DBSAW No.922/2021, counsel brought our attention to a

further direction which does not concern the petitioner in that case

which reads as under:-

(3 of 3) [SAW-914/2021]

"This Court after considering above law holds that the candidates are required as per the PG Regulations-2000 to complete minimum 80% of the training programme for passing PG course. However, if on account of the reasons beyond their control, a candidate has not completed 80% training program, he would be allowed to appear in the examination but, the result of the examination shall only be declared on completion of 80%three years training programme as provided under Rule 13.2 of the MCI PG Regulations-2000. The candidate will be relieved only thereafter and his PG Degree shall also be released only thereafter."

In our view, the observations and directions of the learned

Single Judge in the above quoted portion are too wide, passed in

favour of non-petitioners and without full examination of the rules

and regulations of the university governing the question of

deficiency in attendance of a student. These general directions

therefore ought not to have been issued. The above quoted

portion of the judgment of the learned Single Judge is deleted.

With respect to the petitioner in this case also, there shall be no

effect of this order.

All appeals are disposed of accordingly.

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

Anil Goyal/BRIJ MOHAN GANDHI / 13-15

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)