Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1099 (RAJ)

Pragya Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2015-05-19

SUNIL AMBWANI, VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

body2015
Judgment : 1. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 2. The delay of 17 days in filing this Special Appeal has been sufficiently explained. The delay is accordingly condoned. The application for condonation of delay is allowed. 3. By the judgment dated 26.02.2015 under challenge, learned Single Judge has allowed relief to the petitioner to pay the amount, in lieu of release of bank guarantee of Rs.1.5 lacs and surety bond of Rs.3.5 lacs, deposited by her for pursuing Post Graduate Course in the Department of Pathology in SMS Medical College, Jaipur in easy installments. The petitioner, after her admission in SMS Medical College, Jaipur, secured better rank next year, in the All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination, 2015. In the counselling, she secured a seat of her choice in a College in Delhi. She had, as a condition to her admission in Delhi, requested to release of the documents, which was allowed, subject to payment of the amount under the bank guarantee and surety bond, to which she agreed. Thereafter, she made a request for payment of the amount in easy installments, which was denied. Learned Single Judge has directed the amount to be paid in a manner as follows:- “Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the respondents and taking into consideration similar orders passed in SBCWP Nos.2620/20140 – Dr. Neelam Sani v. State of Raj. & Anr., 3497/2014 Dr.Naresh Bansal & Ors. v. State of Raj. & Ors. decided on 25.4.2014 & 1076/2012 Dr. Lokeshwar Prasad Meena v. State of Rajasthan & Ors decided on 28.2.2013, I would direct that the amounts due to the respondent SMS Medical College, Jaipur by the petitioner both towards remainder bond amount and the refund of stipend received by the petitioner as a P.G student be calculated and surveyed to her within a period of two days from receipt of the copy of this order. Thereupon the petitioner would be required to immediately pay 25% of the aforesaid amount as computed and conveyed and the remainder amount in six equal monthly instalments. The remainder amount aforesaid be calculated with interest @ 5% on reducing basis. Six post dated cheques of equal amounts towards the payment on 75% of the remainder amount due and interest thereon, after payment of 25% amount as directed above be furnished by the petitioner to the SMS Medical College, Jaipur. The remainder amount aforesaid be calculated with interest @ 5% on reducing basis. Six post dated cheques of equal amounts towards the payment on 75% of the remainder amount due and interest thereon, after payment of 25% amount as directed above be furnished by the petitioner to the SMS Medical College, Jaipur. The petitioner will also furnish along-with the six post dated cheques a surety of an employee of the Central Government / Government of Rajasthan towards the payment of the amounts due after payment of 25% amount of the total amount payable as computed by the said Medical College comprised of (i) remainder amount under the bond of Rs. 5 lacs and (ii) amount of stipend paid to the petitioner and (iii) interest. On compliance by the petitioner as aforesaid, the respondent SMS Medical College is directed to release the original papers to the petitioner. It is made clear that in the event of post dated cheques towards the repayment of due amount as directed here-in-above bouncing / being dishonoured, aside of civil liability, the petitioner shall also be visited with prosecution under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.” 4. The petitioner has partly complied with the order and has deposited Rs.1,55,000/- and a further amount of Rs.78,500/-, after which she has filed this Special Appeal praying for payment of the amount in more easier installments, on the ground that she will get stipend of only Rs.30,000/- per month. The petitioner's father is a retired Army Officer. 5. We do not find that the order of learned Single Judge requires interference for any modification. The petitioner has received sympathetic consideration, on which the Court has allowed facility of payment in easy installments, towards which she has also deposited part of the amount and has acquiesced to the order. 6. The Special Appeal is dismissed. The application of interim order is rejected.