Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Dr. Sudin S.R vs State Of Kerala on 16 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 16764 of 2009(M)


1. DR. SUDIN S.R,NAVANEETHAM, H. NO. 163,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,

3. COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS

4. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY

5. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, MCI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :16/06/2010

 O R D E R
                           K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                       ---------------------------
                     W.P(C).No.16764 of 2009
                  ------------------------------------
                Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010

                             J U D G M E N T

Connected Writ Petitions, namely, W.P(C) No.15465 of 2009

and connected cases, were disposed of by the judgment dated

25/06/2009. For the sake of convenience, the judgment is

extracted below:

“The challenge in these writ petitions relates to the

validity of sub clauses (iii), (iv) and (v) of Clause III (a) of the

prospectus issued by the Directorate of Medical Education for

Post Graduate Super Specialty Courses, Kerala, 2009. Though

counter affidavit is filed by the Government, supporting some of

the clauses, Government then reconsidered the matter.

Senior Government Pleader, Mr.T.B.Hood, submits that the

Government has decided to delete the aforementioned clauses,

namely sub clauses (iii), (iv) and (v) of clause III(a) of the said

prospectus. Submission is recorded.

2. Accordingly, the aforementioned clauses shall

stand deleted from the prospectus and the consequential

notification. All the petitioners in these writ petitions shall be

permitted to appear in the Common Entrance Examination for

Post Graduate Super Specialty Courses, Kerala, 2009. Their

applications shall be treated as regular, and shall be

considered in accordance with law.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C).

16009/2009, submits that the writ petition also contains a

challenge against the validity of Act 29 of 2008. He prays that

W.P(C). No.16764/2009
2

the said challenge may be left open to be prosecuted by the

petitioner, if so advised at a later point of time. Said prayer is

left open.

Writ petitions are disposed of as above.”

2. In view of the judgment dated 25/6/2009, this Writ

Petition is disposed of in the same manner in which those cases

were disposed of.

3. Sri. B. Raghunathan, the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has got admission for

M.Ch and that he is continuing his studies. This submission is

recorded.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

scm


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.153 seconds.