"Secure admission, that will be the happiest day for me:" Kerala High Court judge while dismissing medical aspirant's plea

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday had a few encouraging words of advice for an aspiring medical student even as it dismissed her petition challenging the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) reservations in medical seats (Shilpa S Jayadev v State of Kerala)..Justice PV Kunhikrishnan issued the order in which he urged the young student to move on from the Court case and keep trying until she reaches her goal of being a doctor."Petitioner ought to have spent time to study well in the ensuing academic year and get admission to her dream course instead of spending time for this legal battle. This is not the end of her educational career. I wish her all the best to get admission to her dream course by attempting the qualifying examination the next time if it is possible. Take it as a revenge and show the society that the medical science is safe in your hand. That will be the happiest day to the author of this judgment just like to you and to your loving parents," the Court said..Justice Kunhikrishnan opined that even though the Court would be justified in imposing costs on the petitioner for having filed three petitions with similar prayers, he would not do the same since the matter pertained to innocent attempts of a young girl with high aspirations."The petitioner filed three writ petitions with almost similar prayers. One writ petition was amended twice and thereafter withdrawing the same the present writ petition is filed with almost same prayers. According to me this writ petition is to be dismissed with heavy cost because the petitioner is wasting the time of this court by filing writ petition after writ petition with various prayers and that also at belated stages. But I am reluctant to impose cost in this case treating it as an innocent attempt of an innocent girl to get admission for her dream course of MBBS," the order said. .The Court also had a few words of advice for the young petitioner on how to move ahead as far her ambitions are concerned despite being denied reliefs by the Court. "After describing the “Ramayana” of Thunjath Ezhuthachan, the legend of Malayalam Poet, Sri. Vallathol in his famous poetry “THONEEYATHRA” said like this: 'ആനന്ദ ലബ്ധി ക്കെനി എന്തു വേണം' (one does not need anything more to be happy). If the petitioner attains this goal, I will borrow the same words and will say like this: 'ആനന്ദ ലബ്ധി ക്കെനി എന്തു വേണം'"God bless you! This writ petition is devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed. No cost," the Court said..The Court issued the order on a petition filed by an MBBS aspirant seeking to secure admission for the year 2021 based on an application she had submitted for the year 2018-2019.The primary contention of the petitioner, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste community, was that the reservation of seats available to the SC/ST communities for the professional degree course is to be computed-based on the total number of seats available for the course..The Court noted that the petitioner had filed an application to gain admission for the 2018-2019 academic year. In the first phase of allotment, the petitioner obtained a BDS seat at a government dental college. She submitted a representation on July 27, 2018, and, thereafter, filed a petition before the High Court. This first petition was disposed of by the High Court recording the submission of the Government Pleader that the prospectus provides for 8 per cent reservation on a State-wide basis and this is being strictly adhered to.In the second phase of allotment on August 16, 2018, the petitioner was again denied MBBS seat but allotted a BDS seat at a different government dental college. A second petition with similar prayers was filed by her in 2019 but it was amended and filed again in March 2020, as the Court noted from its records.The present petition was filed in May 2021.The sum and substance of the contention of the petitioner in the present plea was that the reservation of seats earmarked to SC/ST candidates was wrongly computed in the academic year in which she first applied and therefore, she may be given a seat in the current academic year and the respondents may be directed to pay compensation for the denial of her legitimate claim.To make out her case, reliance was placed on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhny & Ors. v Union of India & Ors., Anil Kumar Gupta & Ors vState of UP & Ors and Saurav Yadav & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..However, upon perusing the same, the Court found that in all those cases, the apex court passed orders because of the fault of the institutions and authorities in giving admission to candidates.The Court also noted that the petitioner had not approached the Court on time, constraining it from passing any orders in her favour.Pertinently ,the Court pulled up the petitioner as it observed that same point raised by the petitioner in this case was raised in the previous petitions which the Court had already rejected then. While the Judge opined that this would be a fit case to impose heavy costs for filing cases repeatedly in the same matter and wasting the time and resources of the Court, it decided against it considering the age and aspirations of the petitioner.[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.