Rajasthan High Court
Santoshi Meena Son Of Shri Lajja ... vs Rajasthan University Of Health ... on 17 November, 2021
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.811/2021
Santoshi Meena S/o Shri Lajja Ram Meena, aged about 30 years,
R/o Umreh Tehsil Badi, District Dholpur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, through its
Registrar, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk
Road, Jaipur 302033.
2. Principal Secretary, Medical Education, Government of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Principal, RNT Medical College, Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Mehta
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
17/11/2021
This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned
Single Judge dated 10/08/2021 passed in Writ Petition
No.3512/2021.
Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner was a student
of Medical College of respondent No.3. She had appeared in the
M.B.B.S. examination in the year 2009. The authorities alleged
that the petitioner had committed cheating and impersonation in
such examination. An inquiry report was prepared prima-facie
suggesting examination malpractice by the petitioner and 15 other
similar candidates. Based on such report, a show cause notice was
issued to the petitioner on 20/04/2011 by the authorities. On
(2 of 4) [SAW-811/2021]
12/05/2011, the authorities cancelled the admission of the
petitioner and other students. The petitioner challenged such
decision by filing Writ Petition No.7913/2011. On 27/01/2014, the
learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of the writ petition and
required the authorities to obtain an independent FSL report. In
such order, it was provided that if the report comes adverse to the
petitioners then the impugned order would become effective and
thereby admission of the students would be treated as cancelled.
The authorities thereupon obtained such a report from Finger Print
Division, Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Central Bureau of
Investigation, New Delhi. Such report was adverse to the
petitioner. The Rajasthan University of Health Sciences therefore
passed an order on 17/11/2017 and after decision of the learned
Single Judge dated 27/01/2014 treated the petitioner's admission
as cancelled.
Thereupon, the petitioner first filed Writ Petition
No.9581/2017 and sought a direction from the court to allow her
to appear in the Third Professional M.B.B.S. Part-II Examination
which was to be held in June, 2017. This petition was dismissed by
an order dated 23/08/2017 as being misdirected since the order of
cancellation of the admission had attained finality. Thereafter, in
the year 2021, the petitioner filed the present petition in which
she has challenged the said order dated 17/11/2017 treating her
admission as cancelled. She has further prayed for direction to
declare the results of the examination she had appeared in and
further to allow her to compete the remaining course of M.B.B.S.
This petition came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on
the grounds of delay and laches. It was observed that the
(3 of 4) [SAW-811/2021]
impugned order was passed on 17/11/2017, whereas the
petitioner has filed the petition fours years later.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at a
considerable length.
He submitted that the petitioner had before filing the present
petition approached the High Court may be in a wrong litigation
being mis-advised. However, there was no intention on the part of
the petitioner to forego the challenge and petition should not have
been dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Even if we ignore the considerable delay in filing the writ
petition against the order of cancellation of admission of the
petitioner, on merits also the petitioner has no case. As noted long
back in the year 2009, the petitioner was allegedly caught
cheating and impersonation in MBBS examination. The decision of
the authority to cancel her admission came to be interfered by the
learned Single Judge in a limited way back. The authorities were
required to obtain an independent FSL opinion. It was clarified
that if the opinion of the FSL is adverse to the petitioner only the
cancellation order would revive. This is exactly what happened.
The University obtained a report of Finger Print Division, Central
Forensic Science Laboratory, Central Bureau of Investigation, New
Delhi. The report was adverse to the petitioner. A fresh order
therefore was passed on 17/11/2017 treating her admission as
cancelled. The petitioner has challenged the order. There is no
formal challenge to the FSL report. Even if we ignore this minor
technicality, the petitioner has to successfully impinge the findings
of the report so as to sustain the challenge against the order
dated 17/11/2017. In the earlier round of litigation, the learned
Single Judge had kept a small window open for the petitioner
(4 of 4) [SAW-811/2021]
namely; the authorities to obtain a fresh report of FSL. All other
issues should be seem to have been terminated. The future of the
petitioner's admission would depend on the contents of such
report. Now that the report is adverse to the petitioner, she cannot
avoid the consequences thereof. Even otherwise, there is no
material or worthy arguments raised before us to shake the
validity of the report itself. The report has been submitted by an
independent agency. In the field requiring technical expertise,
intervention by the court would be rare and exceptional. In any
case, the disputed question such as correctness of the FSL report
on the identity of thumb impressions, would not be examined in a
writ petition.
For such reasons, appeal is dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ
ANIL GOYAL/B.M. GANDHI/8
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
