High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed of; no relief granted; p...

Dr Farzana and others v. State of Kerala and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 31028 of 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • T. R. Ravi
Judgment Date
2023-10-06
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition disposed of; no relief granted. The court held that the third round is an option confirmation and that no fresh options can be submitted. Stray vacancy rules requiring relinquishment of already allotted seats remain applicable, and the petitioners’ rights are safeguarded within the amended framework.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed of; no relief granted; petitioners’ rights safeguarded within amended scheme.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Dr Farzana
  • Dr Ashifa Iqbal
  • Bijna Badar
  • Ananthu. R
  • Dr Vishak Chand CU

Respondents

  • Director, Medical Education Department, Government of Kerala, Office of the Director of Medical Education, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN – 695001
  • Controller of Examinations, Medical Post Graduate Degree Courses, Housing Board Buildings, Santhi Nagar, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN – 695 001
  • The Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, Government of Kerala, Housing Board Buildings, Santhi Nagar, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN – 695 001
  • Director, Department of Health, Government of Kerala, Secretariate, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN – 695 001
  • The State of Kerala, represented by the Additional Secretary, Department of Health, Women and Child Welfare, Government Secretariate, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN - 695001

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Adv. A. Jani (Kollam)

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. P. G. Pramod, GP

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioners, five medical graduates (Dr Farzana, Dr Ashifa Iqbal, Bijna Badar, Ananthu R, and Dr Vishak Chand CU), challenge amendments to the prospectus for admission to postgraduate dental (MDS) courses in Kerala. They contend that altering the prospectus after the selection process began, particularly converting the third round from a mop-up round to a confirmation round, deprives them of the opportunity to submit fresh options and may compel them to give up seats in stray vacancy rounds, causing detriment. They rely on the principle, illustrated in Sreeja S. and others v. State of Kerala and others (2013 (1) KHC 230), that changing the rules after the game has started breaches fairness. The respondents argue that the amendments were contemplated by the original prospectus and that the third round constitutes a mere confirmation step, allowing candidates to better their already provided options without creating new rights to reconfigure choices. The court, presided by Justice T. R. Ravi, evaluates whether the amendments are to the petitioners’ detriment and whether any real grievance exists. It concludes that the third round, as amended, is an option confirmation and that stray vacancy rules require relinquishing allotted seats as a calculated risk. Consequently, the petition is closed without relief, and the petitioners’ rights are deemed safeguarded within the amended framework.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that amending the prospectus after the selection process began is illegal and that converting the third round into a confirmation round deprives candidates of fresh options, potentially affecting their rights during stray vacancy. They rely on the principle from Sreeja S. which held that rules cannot be changed after the game has begun. They stress the need to preserve fairness and the opportunity to alter choices in light of new circumstances.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents maintain that the amendments were contemplated by the original prospectus and that the third round is a confirmation stage, not a fresh option round. They contend that stray vacancy rounds require candidates to relinquish seats, a calculated risk accepted at the time of admission, and that no new rights are created to submit fresh options in the third round.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sreeja S and others v. State of Kerala and others2013 (1) KHC 230DistinguishedCited to illustrate the principle that changes in rules post-start can be impermissible, but the court distinguished it because the prospectus in this case expressly authorized the changes and the third round functioned as a confirmation step.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Dr Farzana and others v. State of Kerala and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI** **FRIDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 14TH ASWINA, 1945** ## **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **PETITIONERS:** |**1**|**DR FARZANA,**| |---|---| ||**AGED 26 YEARS,**| ||**D/O MUHAZIN, RESIDING AT BRIGHT MANZIL,**| ||**KOTTIYAM P.O, KOLLAM., PIN – 691 571**| |**2**|**DR ASHIFA IQBAL,**| ||**AGED 28 YEARS**| ||**W/O DR AMJAD NAJEEB, RESIDING AT AISHAS,**| ||**KOTTANKULANGARA P.O, KOLLAM, PIN – 693 583**| |**3**|**BIJNA BADAR,**| ||**AGED 28 YEARS**| ||**D/O BADAR, RESIDING AT AJ MANZIL,**| ||**PAZHACHANTHA, KALLARA P.O,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695 608**| |**4**|**ANANTHU. R,**| ||**AGED 28 YEARS**| ||**S/O RAVEENDRAN PILLAI,**| ||**RESIDING AT MAKAM, KUNNATHOOR EAST P.O,**| ||**KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 690 540**| |**5**|**DR VISHAK CHAND CU,**| ||**AGED 29 YEARS, S/O CHANDRAN. T,**| ||**RESIDING AT TC 24/899/1, THAI BHAVAN,**| ||**METTUKADA, THYCAUD P.O,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695 014**| ||**BY ADV A.JANI(KOLLAM)**| ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 DIRECTOR, MEDICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001** **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **2** - **2 CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MEDICAL POST GRADUATE DEGREE COURSES, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001** - **3 THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001** - **4 DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001** - **5 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001** **SRI. P. G. PRAMOD. GP.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **3** ## **`T.R.RAVI, J.`** ``` ---------------------------------------- WP(C) No.31028 of 2023 ``` ``` ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 06[th]day of October, 2023 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ``` The grievance of the petitioners is that by amending the prospectus after the selection process started, an illegality has been committed. As per the ranking, the petitioners were alloted seats in the first round of allotment. In the second round of allotment, since there was no scope for bettering the prospects, they remained in the same seat. They are aggrieved by the amendment brought in, whereby the third round which was initially to be a mop-up round was also made a confirmation round. It is submitted that by taking away the chance of giving fresh options in the third round, their rights are affected. It is also submitted that while they are entering the stray vacancy round, they will have to give up the seats which have already been alloted to them, which may also be to their detriment. ``` ``` 2. The counsel for the petitioners relies on the decision of this Court in Sreeja S and others v. State of Kerala ``` **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **4** ``` and others [2013 (1) KHC 230], wherein a learned Single Judge had cataloged the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the question whether the rules of the game can be changed after the game has begun and has held that it cannot be done. The prospectus in this case specifically says that changes can be brought in with regard to the method of allotment that is being followed. It is based on that provision, which was contained in the prospectus originally itself, that changes have been brought in. All that this Court has to look into is whether the changes that have been brought in are to the detriment of the petitioners. In the case on hand, since the third round is only a confirmation round, the rights of the petitioners will not be affected in any manner, since every person who is participating in the third round can only better their prospects based on their own options which they had given earlier and none of them can submit a fresh option at that stage. Since nobody gets an opportunity to submit a fresh option, the petitioners cannot have any grievance on that issue. The next issue is whether while passing on to the stray vacancy round, any ``` **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **5** ``` injustice will be caused by requiring the candidates to give up the seats which they have already been alloted for the purpose of participating in the stray vacancy. As far as that aspect is concerned, even in the earlier prospectus at the stage of stray vacancy, a person can participate only after giving up the seat. The reason being that the said seat will be available for the other candidates, if they wanted to better their option. That is a calculated risk that a candidate takes at the stage of stray vacancy. That cannot be in any manner said to be a right. Moreover, no changes are brought about by the amendments as far as that clause is concerned because the conditions prescribed for stray vacancy earlier, are continuing even now. ``` ``` 3. In the above circumstances, I do not find any real grievance that needs to be answered by this Court. The writ petition is hence closed with the observation that the third round of allotment as already stated in the amended prospectus is only an option confirmation and no person can submit a fresh option in that round. The rights of the petitioners are safeguarded in that manner. If the ``` **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **6** ``` petitioners had participated in the third round and confirmed their options, necessarily that would reflect in the results that are to be published today and confirmed tomorrow. ``` ## **`Sd/-`** ``` T.R.RAVI JUDGE ``` ``` sn ``` **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **7** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31028/2023** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPYOF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 1ST PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPYOF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPYOF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 3RD PETITIONER Exhibit P4 TRUE COPYOF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 4TH PETITIONER Exhibit P5 TRUE COPYOF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 5TH PETITIONER** **Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATIONS IN MEDICAL SCIENCES INVITED APPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL ELIGIBILITY CUM ENTRANCE TEST-MDS FOR ADMISSION TO MDS COURSES 2023-24** **Exhibit P7 TRUE COPYOF THE SCORECARD OBTAINED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER IN THE NEET-MDS EXAMINATION FOR THE SESSION 2023-24 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF SCORECARD OF THE SECOND PETITIONER Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF SCORECARD OF THE 3RD PETITIONER Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF SCORECARD OF THE 4TH PETITIONER Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF SCORECARD OF THE 5TH PETITIONER Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF ALLOTMENT MEMO OF THE FIRST PETITIONER Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ALLOTMENT MEMO OF THE SECOND PETITIONER** **WP(C) NO. 31028 OF 2023** **8** - **Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF ALLOTMENT MEMO OF THE THIRD PETITIONER Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF ALLOTMENT MEMO OF THE FOURTH PETITIONER Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF ALLOTMENT MEMO OF THE FIFTH PETITIONER Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION INVITING APPLICATIONS FOR ADMISSION TO POST-GRADUATE COURSES IN DENTAL SURGERY (MDS), KERALA 2023** - **Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION TO THE POSTGRADUATE COURSE IN DENTAL SURGERY (MDS-MASTER OF DENTAL SURGERY) 2023 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,** - **Exhibit P19 TRUE COPYOF NOTIFICATION FOR ALLOTMENT TO PG DENTAL (MDS) COURSES 2023 AND SCHEDULE FOR THE FIRST PHASE OF ALLOTMENT OPTIONS ISSUED BY THE 8. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS ON 10//08/2023** - **Exhibit P20 TRUE COPY OF OPTION REGISTRATION OF THE FIRST ALLOTMENT FOR ADMISSION TO MDS POSTGRADUATION COURSE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA VIDE ORDER NO. 2084/202/H & FWD** - **Exhibit P21 TRUE COPY OF CHANGED PROSPECTUS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA ORDER NO. 234/2023/H&FWD DATED 25/08/2023** - **Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION ADMISSION TO PG MEDICAL COURSES-2023 THIRD ROUND ALLOTMENT** **Exhibit P23 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO 234/2023/H&FWD DATED 25/08/2023 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA** **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL** **//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE**