Karnataka High Court imposes ₹1 lakh costs on Karnataka Examination Authority for illegally allotting MD seat

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on the Karnataka Examination Authority (KEA) for illegally allotting a seat in MD Respiratory Medicine at the Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Respiratory and Chest Diseases, Bangalore. [Dr Rajesh Kumar D v. State of Karnataka and Ors.].A Bench of Chief Justice PS Dinesh Kumar and Justice TG Shivashankare Gowda noted KEA's failure to demonstrate how the seat was allotted to one of the respondents in the second round of counselling without a seat being available..The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by Dr Rajesh Kumar D seeking the restoration of his seat in MD Respiratory Medicine at the college.The petitioner appeared for NEET PG in 2021. He claimed a seat under the Scheduled Caste (SC) quota as an in-service candidate working in an autonomous Iistitution.He received a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to pursue PG studies and was allotted the seat in the first round of counseling on February 2, 2022..A month later, KEA sent the petitioner a copy of a letter written by the Directorate of Medical Education (DME) instructing the KEA to cancel the petitioner’s seat. However, instead of being made available in the second round of counseling, the seat was clandestinely allotted to another candidate.Aggrieved, the petitioner moved the High Court, arguing that DME's instructions to cancel the seat without issuing notice and hearing him violated principles of natural justice..Counsel for KEA contended that during document verification, the petitioner had stated he would submit the NOC, but failed to do so despite being given ample opportunity, leading to the cancellation of his seat. The National Medical Commission (NMC) submitted that KEA had not followed proper procedures in seat allotment and sought a thorough investigation..The Court, based on the document verification slip issued by KEA to the petitioner, noted that the NOC had indeed been submitted. KEA argued that the NOC was for a different course, but the Court opined that KEA should have rejected the NOC instead of recording its submission. Moreover, the Court suggested that KEA could have sought clarification from Jayadeva Institute, the college at which the petitioner completed his MBBS.The Court further noted from the record that the cancellation letter was issued immediately after the candidate who was eventually allotted the seat, addressed a letter to DME. It also noted that a copy of the letter was sent to the petitioner seven days after it was written.Additionally, based on a notification outlining rules for admission to PG medical courses, the Court observed that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to be heard.The Court also noted that instead of being made available in the next round of counseling, the seat was allotted to another person. In this context, the Court observed,"The KEA has failed to demonstrate as to how the seat was allotted to the sixth respondent in the second round of counselling without there being any seat available.".Both KEA and the other candidate argued that even if the latter's allotment was deemed unlawful, it should not affect him as he had already completed one year of the course. KEA proposed to allot a vacant seat in the same course and institution to the petitioner. However, the Court rejected this argument, reasoning that it was an attempt to defeat the petitioner's claim and cover up the illegal allotment..Therefore, the Court deemed the unilateral cancellation of the seat allotted to the petitioner and the subsequent allotment to the other candidate to be illegal. Consequently, it quashed the other candidate's allotment and directed KEA to allot the petitioner a seat in the course and issue necessary orders within two weeks. Additionally, it imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on KEA..The petitioner was represented by Advocate Akkamahadevi Hiremath.The State and DME were represented by Advocate Sudeev Hegde.NMC was represented by Advocate N Khetty.Jayadeva Institute was represented by Advocate DJ Rakshitha.The other candidate was represented by Advocate SB Mukkannappa..[Read Order]