Pay Rs 15L to doctor denied PG seat by PIMS, rules Madras High Court
The bench, in its order, said it is unable to subscribe to the views of the single judge who dismissed the writ petitions relying on the prospectus of PIMS without considering the new regulations.
Published: 02nd October 2023 09:28 AM | Last Updated: 02nd October 2023 09:28 AM | A+A A-
Madras High Court. (File photo)
CHENNAI: Expressing anguish over the rampant commercialisation of medical education and denying admission to a rightful candidate, the Madras High Court ordered compensation of Rs 15 lakh to the candidate to be borne by the institute concerned and the government authorities who failed to take appropriate action.
A division bench of Justices R Subramanian and R Kalaimathi passed the orders recently on an appeal filed by Dr P Sidharthan who was denied admission to a postgraduate course in general medicine by Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) in 2017 despite being allotted the seat under government quota.
“We are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to a monetary compensation, which we fix at Rs 15 lakh. Of this, the college will pay Rs 10 lakh and CENTAC Rs 5 lakh for its inaction,” the bench ordered. It directed the respondents to pay the amount in four weeks.
The case of the petitioner, who is a serving govt doctor, is that he was allotted a seat for MS (general surgery) at PIMS under government quota based on NEET marks in 2017 but the institute denied him admission on the pretext of delay in paying a fee (which was higher than govt fixed amount) and failure to execute a bond for compulsory service for a year after completion of the course. Sidharthan filed two writ petitions which were dismissed, prompting him to file the appeal.
During arguments before the division bench, advocate VBR Menon, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the writ court had overlooked the fact that 50% of seats are to be filled by the state government in private medical colleges and the government fixed fee only be collected.
The bench, in its order, said it is unable to subscribe to the views of the single judge who dismissed the writ petitions relying on the prospectus of PIMS without considering the new regulations.“We express anguish at the manner in which education has been commercialised by unscrupulous private individuals or institutions,” the judges observed.
