G. M. Sowmitha v. Academic Officer, The Tamil Nadu Dr. M. G. R. Medical University, Guindy
2015-03-31
V.M.VELUMANI
body2015
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition praying to call for the records relating to the Impugned order in R.C.No.ACAD/1-(4)/43935/2010 dated 10.01.2012 passed by the first respondent herein and to quash the same as illegal and direct the Respondents herein to award the petitioner BDS Degree. 2. The Petitioner joined in the second respondent college for BDS Course in the year 1999. While studying in the college, her parents conducted her marriage with one Dr.P.M.Padmanabhan of Bangalore. She passed the final year Bachelor of Dental Surgery Degree examination held in February 2007 and the first respondent issued Provisional Certificate on 10.05.2007. 3. In order to qualify to receive the BDS Degree, the petitioner has to complete the Compulsory Rotatory Internship (CRI) for one year in the second respondent College. After her marriage, she settled at Bangalore. Therefore, she requested the respondents 1 and 2 to permit her to do Compulsory Rotatory Internship programme and applied for at the third respondent college on transfer. Permission was granted. 4. According to the petitioner, she completed Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme and applied for degree to the first respondent. The first respondent by the impugned order, dated 10.01.2012 directing the petitioner to re-do the Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme. The petitioner has challenged the said impugned order before this Court by way of writ petition on the ground that she has already completed Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme in the third respondent college with the permission of the respondents 1 & 2. Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to regulation and invalid. 5. The first respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner did not complete Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme continuously. There was a break period in Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme. By the letter dated 08.10.2010, the petitioner's father requested the first respondent to condone the break period in Compulsory Rotatory Internship Programme. As per the Regulations based on the said representation, the first respondent condoned the break period of the petitioner and directed the petitioner to re-do her entire period of CRI training at S.R.M.Dental College. Even after condoning the break period, the petitioner refused to re-do the entire period of CRI training. The petitioner's father and mother sent repeated representations to issue PPC-II Certificate to their daughter.
Even after condoning the break period, the petitioner refused to re-do the entire period of CRI training. The petitioner's father and mother sent repeated representations to issue PPC-II Certificate to their daughter. Therefore, the first respondent by the impugned letter dated 10.01.2012 directed the petitioner to re-do the entire period of CRI training. The petitioner has rejoined on 05.03.2012 in the second respondent college to do her CRI programme for a period of one year. After joining the programme, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 7. When the matter is taken up for final hearing, the learned counsel for the first respondent represented that the petitioner has failed to complete the CRI programme in second respondent college and left in the middle. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to family way of the petitioner she could not continue her CRI programme. He further submitted that she may be permitted to re-do the CRI programme at Madurai now. 9. In view of the above submission, the petitioner is directed to approach the first respondent for permission to re-do the CRI programme. On such request, the first respondent is directed to consider the said request sympathetically and permit the petitioner to re-do the CRI programme as per the regulations. 10. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.