“Supreme Court Quashes Relief: Upholding Authority’s Decision, Jurisdiction Examined”
Title: Dr. Shyamsundar vs. The Union Of India
Citation: W.P NO. 12792 OF 2023
Coram: JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
Decided on: 31-10-2023
Introduction:
In this case, the rule has been made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties. The petitioner has presented prayer clauses (B) and (C) requesting the issuance of appropriate writs, orders, or directions to compel respondent No.2 to conduct the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test-Super speciality 2023 for the petitioner. Additionally, the petitioner seeks restraint on respondent No.2 from declaring the results of the mentioned examination pending the hearing and final disposal of the writ petition.
Facts:
The petitioner, a qualified M.D. (Medicine), applied for the D.M. (Doctor of Medicine) entrance exam conducted by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences. Despite successfully uploading the required documents and receiving the admit card, he faced issues during the examination as he did not carry a physical copy of his Medical Council registration certificate. The authorities, citing instructions, refused entry without the specified document, leading to the petitioner being disallowed from taking the exam. The petitioner contends that he should be allowed to appear for a special examination, challenging the authorities’ decision. The response argues that the petitioner, a senior doctor, should have adhered to the specified requirements and blames his failure to carry the document on his part. The court considers the importance of maintaining examination integrity, highlighting the elaborate instructions and protocols outlined by the examination authorities. The judgment emphasizes the necessity of physical documents for identity verification and upholds the decision to disallow the petitioner based on non-compliance with specified requirements.
Judgement analysis:
In this case, the court refers to a previous order in Dhanashree N. Jagtap where an opportunity was granted to respondents to consider allowing the petitioner to appear for the exam. The respondents, on instructions, stated that a fresh examination would be conducted for both petitioners. However, this order was subsequently quashed by the Supreme Court. The court notes that ulterior motives cannot be attributed to Respondent No.2 for denying entry to the petitioner, emphasizing that had the petitioner carried the Medical Registration certificate, there would have been no impediment to entering the examination hall. The court dismisses the petitioner’s claim, stating that the refusal by authorities to permit entry without the required certificate cannot be faulted. The judgment also addresses the maintainability of the petition, citing legal principles regarding the jurisdiction based on the location of the cause of action. The court concludes by dismissing the petition with no order as to costs.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written By: Gauri Joshi