Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 93 (KER)

Rumanaah Nowshad v. State Of Kerala

2024-01-23

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

body2024
JUDGMENT : The petitioner completed her graduation in medicine from the 4th respondent – College, which is affiliated to the 2nd respondent – Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), after satisfying her internship in the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode, which, she says, was done based on Ext.P5 permission granted by the 2nd respondent. She alleges that, however, solely on the ground that she has not completed internship in her parent college, the 3rd respondent – Kerala State Medical Council, has now issued Ext.P9 proceedings dated 03.03.2023, informing that her internship in Community Medicine will not be recognized, which has been followed by Ext.P15 order of the Government, whereby, she has been asked to do it again in her parent College. 2. The petitioner points out that Ext.P15 has been issued solely on account of the statements in Ext.P9; and hence, that both of them are illegal, since she has completed her internship as per law under the watch and consent of the 2nd respondent, as per Ext.P5. She, therefore, prays that Exts.P9 and the consequential Ext.P15 be set aside. 3. Interestingly, in response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioner by her learned counsel – Sri.Millu Dandapani, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent – Sri.P.Sreekumar, affirmed that Ext.P5 order was issued by his client, allowing the petitioner to complete her internship in Community Medicine at the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode, adverting to Ext.P4 ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) issued by the 3rd respondent and overruling their requirement therein – that it shall be done only in her parent college. He argued that, in fact, the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode, is no less an institution than the parent college of the petitioner; and therefore, that, for that reason alone, Ext.P9 ought not to have been issued. He further explained that his client has acted expressly in terms of Ext.P2 proceedings issued on 06.08.2020; and hence, that the 3rd respondent could not have refused to accept the internship in Community Medicine completed by the petitioner. He thus prayed that this Writ Petition be allowed. 4. Sri.Vivek Menon – learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, however, submitted that his client had allowed the petitioner Ext.P4 ‘NOC’, expressly on the condition that she will complete her internship in Community Medicine in her parent college. He thus prayed that this Writ Petition be allowed. 4. Sri.Vivek Menon – learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, however, submitted that his client had allowed the petitioner Ext.P4 ‘NOC’, expressly on the condition that she will complete her internship in Community Medicine in her parent college. He, however, conceded, to a pointed question from this Court, that the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode, can never be seen to be an inferior institution than the parent college of the petitioner; but argued that, nevertheless this, when his client specified that the internship should be done in a particular manner, it could have been done in such manner and no other. He thus prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed. 5. Sri.Sunil Kumar Kuriakose – learned Government Pleader, defended Ext.P15 saying that, it has been issued solely as per the instructions obtained from the 3rd respondent; and therefore, that his client will abide by any directions to be issued by this Court. 6. I have evaluated and considered the afore rival contentions, on the touchstone of the various materials available on record. 7. Pertinently, it is conceded, without any reservation, even by the 3rd respondent, that the petitioner has completed her internship in Community Medicine, as per the requirements of the 2nd respondent, as ordered by them in Ext.P5. It is also conceded by all sides that the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode – from where the petitioner has completed her internship in Community Medicine – is also an equal, if not better, institution than her parental college; and there is no imputation, even whisperingly, that her internship is defective on account of any such vitiating factors. 8. In the afore perspective, when one examines the stand of the 3rd respondent, they say that they had issued Ext.P4 ‘NOC’ to the petitioner singularly on the condition that she shall complete her internship in Community Medicine in her parent college. However, the stand of the 2nd respondent is that they have the power to over ride the conditions in Ext.P4 and that they have done so, adverting to Ext.P2 order issued by them earlier; thus allowing the petitioner to complete her internship in the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode -which, according to them, is a superior institution -as per Ext.P5. 9. However, the stand of the 2nd respondent is that they have the power to over ride the conditions in Ext.P4 and that they have done so, adverting to Ext.P2 order issued by them earlier; thus allowing the petitioner to complete her internship in the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode -which, according to them, is a superior institution -as per Ext.P5. 9. Obviously, therefore, this Court cannot find favour with the stand taken by the 3rd respondent because, they edifice their objection on hyper-technical reasons, rather than any consideration of the petitioner’s training being proper on otherwise. This is more so because, the 3rd respondent unequivocally admits that they have already given Provisional Registration to the petitioner and that their only objection is that she did not complete her internship in Community Medicine in her parent institution. 10. As I have already said above, it is without contest that the petitioner has completed her internship from a very prestigious institution like the Government General Hospital, Kozhikode. Since she has done so strictly in terms of Ext.P5 order of the 2nd respondent – which she could not have disregarded, since she was a student registered under them – I cannot find the stand of the 3rd respondent in Ext.P9 to be worthy in law. In the afore circumstances, I allow this Writ Petition and set aside Ext.P9, as also the consequential Ext.P15 order of the Government; with a resultant direction to the competent Authority of the 3rd respondent – Kerala State Medical Council, to grant Permanent Registration to the petitioner, in terms of law and in compliance of all relevant and applicable Rules and Regulations, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.