BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court on Monday issued a notice to the State and Central Governments on a petition questioning the validity of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for Admission to Government seats in Professional Education Institution Rules, 2006, and Karnataka Compulsory Service by Candidates Completed Medical Courses Rules, 2015.
Hearing the petition filed by Dr Sharanya Mohan and 43 others, Justice R Devdas issued the notice. It was also issued to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health and Sciences and Dr BR Ambedkar Medical College and Hospital among others. The petitioners asked the court to consequentially annul all the bonds executed by them pursuant to the said rules.
The petitioners highlighted that many states do not have a compulsory rural service programme. In such cases, the candidates from those states have a distinct advantage over Karnataka students. Thus, there was no equality and hence, it was a violation of fundamental rights. The petitioners said that to pursue higher education in medical sciences by taking postgraduate medical courses, they need to have their name entered in the register of doctors with the Karnataka Medical Council, and also appear for NEET. They also needed their original documents that were submitted to Dr BR Ambedkar Medical College and Hospital, migration certificate, and the no-objection certificate from the Directorate of Medical Education. Without them, they will not be able to appear for NEET, they said.
In this background, the petitioners stated that the department of health and family welfare collected bonds from students as per Rule 11 of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for Admission to Government Seats in Professional Educational Rules, 2006. The said rule was ultra vires of the Karnataka Professional Education Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Determination of Fees) Act, 2006, as well as the Karnataka Educational Institutions Prohibition of Capitation Fee Act, 1984, and the impounding of the documents of the petitioners by the Directorate of Medical Education, Directorate of Medical Education was illegal, the petitioners claimed.