JUDGMENT : An aspiring Doctor, pursuing medical education, has approached this Court against the decision taken by the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), cancelling the seventh semester examinations which she had already taken in early 2020, on the ground that the College, in which she was earlier studying, had not imparted sufficient Clinical Training to her and other students. 2. In the fasciculus of the lengthy pleadings and large number of documents produced by the petitioner on record, the singular assertion is that she had satisfactorily completed the Clinical Training upto the seventh semester of the MBBS Course in S.R. Medical College and Research Centre, Varkala (S.R. Medical College) and therefore, that she was entitled to write the seventh semester examinations and seek an entry to the eighth semester. 3. The petitioner, however, concedes that S.R.Medical College was involved in various litigations, including W.P.(C)Nos.38089/2018 and 15610/2019, at the instance of the erstwhile students alleging that it did not have even the basic facilities for their Training or for successful completion of the Medical Course. The reliefs sought for in the said writ petitions, the petitioner concedes, were that the petitioners therein be directed to be shifted to other Colleges so as to enable them to get proper Clinical Training and to make them competent Medical Doctors. The petitioner also admits that all these litigations finally ended in a Division Bench decision of this Court in W.A.No.583/2020, wherein, the KUHS was given the liberty to consider all the issues, including as to whether the students have obtained proper Clinical Training and whether the examinations written by them, while studying in S.R. Medical College, be cancelled or approved, subject to their assessment. 4. The petitioner submits that pursuant to the directions in the aforementioned judgment, the KUHS has now issued Exhibit P18 order, whereby, the examinations written by her in the seventh semester have been cancelled and she has been asked to be relocated to the Believer's Church Medical College, Thiruvalla into the sixth semester, holding that she did not undergo any Clinical Training in the erstwhile College. 5. 5. The petitioner, therefore, assails Exhibit P18 order and prays that the results of the seventh semester examinations, which she wrote on the strength of Exhibit P10 order of this Court, be directed to be published and further that she be allowed to be promoted to the eighth semester in the Believer's Church Medical College. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Biju Balakrishnan, submitted that various grounds have been impelled by the petitioner in challenge of Exhibit P18 order, the most important of which being the blatant violation of the principles of natural justice, since none of the students had been heard by the KUHS, while a decision to cancel the examinations had been taken. He submitted that, had they been given such an opportunity, they would have been able to impress upon them the fact that the S.R. Medical College had enough facilities at that time for the Clinical Training and that they had successfully completed the same. 7. The learned counsel then contended that, in fact, the above will become self-evident if one goes through Exhibit P24, which is the 'Internal Assessment and Examination Registration Report' of the College, wherein, all the students are shown to have obtained internal marks based on their Clinical Training and that this report had been approved by the KUHS, subsequent to the conduct of examinations pursuant to Exhibit P10 order of this Court. He then asserts that the KUHS, thereafter, cancelled the approval to Exhibit P24, compelling the petitioner to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.3022/2020, which, admittedly, was also disposed of by a learned Division Bench of this Court, along with W.A.No.583/2020, with the following directions: “W.P.(C)Nos.26, 196, 503, 1147, 2256, 2259, 2281, 3022, 3065, 3676, 8148, 11602 and 11640 of 2020 are disposed of granting liberty to the university to take appropriate decision so far as the declaration of results and all consequential actions are concerned, of the students participated in the examinations in accordance with the interim orders passed or otherwise, also bearing in mind the harsh realities, practicality and the provisions under the Regulations, 1999 and the laws of the University enabling the students for a pass to the next level on sitting for the examinations except the 1st MBBS course.” 8. Sri.Biju Balakrishnan alleges that in spite of the directions of the learned Division Bench, the KUHS has mechanically cancelled the examinations and has capriciously found that no Clinical Training had been offered to the students, including the petitioner, in S.R. Medical College. He thus prays that this writ petition be ordered and the petitioner be directed to be placed in the eighth semester, on the strength of the marks secured by her in the seventh semester examinations, conducted pursuant to Exhibit P10 order of this Court. 9. In response to the afore submissions and the allegations contained in this writ petition, Sri.P.Sreekumar, learned Standing Counsel for KUHS, submitted that the MBBS Professional Course is split into three parts, namely, First Professional, Second Professional and Third Professional; with the First Professional MBBS having a duration of two semesters, i.e., S1 and S2; the Second Professional having a duration of three semesters, i.e., S3 to S5; while the Third Professional MBBS Course has two parts -the first one having a duration of two semesters, i.e., S6 and S7 and the second with a duration of another two semesters, i.e., S8 and S9. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that it is thus clear that the petitioner is attempting to enter into the eighth semester, which is the Third Professional Part II of the MBBS Course, even though none of the students -including her batch mates in the S.R. Medical College -had obtained any Clinical Training during the Third Professional Part I MBBS Course at the sixth and seventh semesters level. 10. Sri.P.Sreekumar went on to submit that the litigative history leading to this case began with W.P.(C)No.38089/2018, filed by one of the students of the S.R. Medical College on 21.11.2018, complaining that there were no facilities in the said College; which was followed by W.P.(C)No.15601/2019, filed on 06.06.2019, accusing the College for not even having the basic infrastructural facilities or requirements for the Clinical Training in the Third Professional MBBS Part I, namely, the sixth semester. 11. Sri.P.Sreekumar went on to say that, subsequently, several other writ petitions were also filed, culminating in the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020 and connected cases and that, in paragraph 70 thereof, the learned Division Bench had specifically noticed the contention of the KUHS that S.R. Medical College had not conducted sufficient number of classes nor was any Clinical Training given to the Third Professional MBBS Part I students. He maintainted that, as is evident from the observations of the learned Division Bench in paragraph 70, it was left to the KUHS to decide whether the examinations written by the petitioners therein and other students in the seventh semester should be approved or cancelled, after adverting to all the relevant inputs, including the Clinical Training. 12. Sri.P.Sreekumar, thereafter, explained that Exhibit P10 order had been passed by a learned Single Judge on 07.01.2020, much before the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020 had been delivered; and at that time, the questions relating to absence of proper Clinical Training etc. had not been brought to the notice of this Court in detail. He submitted that, as is limpid from Exhibit P10, the said order had been issued at the time when the writ petition was admitted, but making it clear that the examinations taken by the petitioners and other students cannot be understood to inure to them any entitlement to obtain admission to the eighth semester. He reiteratingly submitted that, as is unmistakable from Exhibit P10, the petitioners therein including the petitioner herein -were allowed to write the examinations only provisionally and subject to further orders from this Court. He then showed me that, through the judgment in W.A.No. 583/2020, the writ petition in which Exhibit P10 order had been issued, was also disposed of in the manner mentioned therein and therefore, that the petitioner cannot rely upon the said order to contend that the results of her examinations in the seventh semester should be published and she be admitted to the eighth semester. 13. Sri.P.Sreekumar concluded his submissions by saying that a statement dated 27.10.2020 has been filed on record as ordered by this Court, wherein it has been explained that several inspections had been conducted by the KUHS into the infrastructural facilities in S.R. Medical College, but that each one of them had shown that the said College did not comply with the minimum requirements as are mandated by the Regulations and further that the inspections of the National Medical Council also prove this. 14. Sri.Titus Mani Vettom, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Medical Council, submitted that the issues relating to S.R. Medical College had obtained the attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.10372/2018 and it was recorded in paragraph 10 thereof as under: “10. 14. Sri.Titus Mani Vettom, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Medical Council, submitted that the issues relating to S.R. Medical College had obtained the attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.10372/2018 and it was recorded in paragraph 10 thereof as under: “10. When we consider the report of the Assessors, in the case of S.R. Educational and Charitable Trust, the physical inspection was carried out on 6th and 7th November 2017. The question involed was of 3rd Batch of 100 students for the academic year 2018-2019. A large number of deficiencies were found as observed in the order dated 31.5.2018 passed by the Government of India: 1. Deficiency of faculty is 12.64% as detailed in the report. 2. Shortage of Residents is 15.21% as detailed in the report. 3. OPD attendance at 2 p.m. On the day of assessment is 575 against the requirement of 600. 4. Bed Occupancy at 10 a.m. On the day of assessment is 37%. 5. There was NIL Major Operation on the day of assessment. 6. There was NIL Normal Delivery on the day of assessment. 7. The workload of Histopathology was NIL on the day of assessment. 8. OPD: Separate Registration counters for male/female are not available. Registration counters for OPD/IPD patients are not separate. 9. Audiometry room is not air-conditioned. Speech Therapy is not available. 10. Casualty: Separate Casualty for O.G. Is not available. 11. O.Ts: They are under renovation. 12. ICUs: There was NIL patient in SICU and only 1 patient in ICCU and 2 patients each in MICU, PICU/NICU. 13. Radiodiagnosis department: Only 1 Mobile X-ray machine is available against the requirement of 2. Only 1 Static X-ray machine is available against the requirement of 2. 14. C.T. Scan is not available. 15. CSSD: Receiving and Distribution points are not separate. 16. Central Research Laboratory is not functional. 17. Lecture Theaters: 2 Lecture Theatres are available against the requirement of 3. 18. Central Library: Students Reading room (Outside) is not furnished. 2,968 books are available against the the requirement of 3,000. 19. Central Photography Section is not available. 20. Students' Hostels: They are shared with BDS students. 21. Residents' Hostel: It is not available. 22. Residential Quarters: NIL quarters are available for Nonteaching staff. 23. Pathology department: Audiovisual aids are not available. Specimens are not available in the Museum. 4 Service Laboratories are not available. 24. 19. Central Photography Section is not available. 20. Students' Hostels: They are shared with BDS students. 21. Residents' Hostel: It is not available. 22. Residential Quarters: NIL quarters are available for Nonteaching staff. 23. Pathology department: Audiovisual aids are not available. Specimens are not available in the Museum. 4 Service Laboratories are not available. 24. Microbiology department: Audiovisual aids are not available. The museum is not available. 7 Service Laboratories were not available. Media Preparation facility, Autoclaving are not available. 25. Pharmacology department: Audiovisual aids are not available. The museum is not available. Clinical Pharmacology laboratory is not available. 26. Forensic Medicine department: Audiovisual aids are not available. Museum is not available. Cold Storage is not available. Autopsy block is under construction. 27. Community Medicine department: Audiovisual aids are not available. Museum is not available. Practical Laboratory is not available. It is not furnished. 28. RHTC: Cold chain equipment is not available. Survey/MCH/ Immunization/FW Register are not available. 29. CME: There was no CME activity during the year. 30. Other deficiencies are as pointed out in the assessment report. 15. Sri.Titus Mani Vettom then submitted that no student, including the petitioner, can be now heard to say that S.R. Medical College had all infrastructural facilities to provide necessary imperative Clinical Training to their students in the year 2019-20, when the Hon'ble Supreme Court had found that even in the inspections conducted during November 2017, such facilities had been woefully insufficient. He then submitted that though the National Medical Council had issued Exhibit P13 proceedings on 04.03.2020 taking a stand that the examinations attempted by the petitioner and other students will be subject to further decision to be taken by this Court in the pending writ petitions, it cannot, in any manner, inure to the benefit of the petitioner herein, since, subsequently, the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020 had been issued, which alone can now cover the field and nothing else. He closed his submissions by saying that consequent to the above mentioned judgment of this Court, the KUHS has now issued Exhibit P18 order, which seals the fate of the petitioner and that this is more so because, even though there are several students in the batch, only one has chosen to approach this Court, while all the others, namely 24, have accepted it and joined the sixth semester in the various colleges allotted to them. 16. 16. As I have said in the prefatory paragraphs of this judgment, the primary assertion of the petitioner, as impelled in this writ petition, is that she and her batch mates had undergone necessary and sufficient Clinical Training at the S.R. Medical College; and, therefore, that the KUHS ought to have permitted them to join the eighth semester, rather than the sixth semester. It is on such predication that the petitioner seeks that the examinations held for the seventh semester be validated, leading to its results being published. 17. Obviously, therefore, the singular question for this Court to consider is whether S.R. Medical College was in a position to give proper and necessary Clinical Training to the students, who were then pursuing the Third Professional Part I MBBS Course. 18. Pertinently, the only manner in which the petitioner asserts that she had undergone proper Clinical Training is by relying on Exhibit P24 report prepared by the Principal of S.R. Medical College and uploaded on the website of the KUHS, with respect to the seventh semester examinations held on the basis of Exhibit P10 order of this Court. It is indubitable from Exhibit P24 that all the students have been shown to be eligible to certain marks consequent to the Clinical Training, but it is apodictic that this information is one which had been uploaded by the College and not by the KUHS. 19. Ineluctably, therefore, when Exhibit P24 report was uploaded by the College, it was certainly incumbent upon the KUHS to evaluate the same and take a decision as to whether it should be approved or not. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioner, pointing out to paragraph 56 of the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020, vehemently submits that Exhibit P24 report was provisionally approved by the KUHS; but concedes that it was cancelled on 04.01.2020, thus compelling the petitioner to file W.P.(C)No. 3022/2020. 20. The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as afore would itself show that the KUHS was not satisfied with the registration details in Exhibit P24 report, uploaded by the S.R. Medical College and that they had, therefore, decided to cancel its provisional registration, which led this Court to issue Exhibit P10 order, permitting the examinations to continue, however, provisionally and subject to the final outcome of the said writ petition. 21. 21. That said, it is needless to restate that, subsequently, the learned Division Bench, in the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020 and connected cases, did not grant approval to the examinations, instead recorded in paragraph 70 thereof that sufficient materials have not been placed before it to enter into a different conclusion than one that was projected by the KUHS – namely, that the students did not undergo proper and sufficient Clinical Training - and then left it to the KUHS to take a final decision on these aspects. 22. Unmistakably, it is on the basis of the afore mentioned directions that Exhibit P18 order had been issued, wherein the KUHS has found unequivocally that none of the students -including the petitioner -had undergone proper Clinical Training during the seventh semester and, consequently, that the examinations cannot be approved, thus forcing them to re-locate the students to the sixth semester in appropriate colleges. 23. As has already seen above, the only manner in which the petitioner attempts to prove that she had undergone Clinical Training in S.R. Medical College is by relying on Exhibit P24 report. However, for the reasons already said above, Exhibit P24 report cannot obtain the imprimatur of this Court as if it is a gospel truth, since the entries therein have been made by the Principal of the said College, which, subsequently, has been found to be incorrect and therefore, cancelled by the KUHS. This cancellation, though challenged before this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.3022/2020, was, however, not disturbed by the learned Division Bench in the judgment in W.A.No.583/2020 and connected cases, thus giving liberty to the KUHS to take a final decision as per law. The KUHS, thereafter, based on earlier inspection reports and other relevant documents, issued Exhibit P18 order, which cannot be found to be in fault in any manner, since, in the absence of any cogent and reliable evidence to show that the students -including the petitioner -had undergone any Clinical Training in the seventh semester at the S.R. Medical College, I cannot allow them to stake claim to the eighth semester and thereafter qualify to be the Medical Doctors, which will certainly be an affront on the interests of the society at large, with the Medical Profession being the final loser. In the afore circumstances, I cannot find favour with any of the contentions of the petitioner or to accede to none of the prayers made in this writ petition and resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed, approving Exhibit P18 order of the KUHS.