IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6327 of 2011(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ DR.MOHANAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.BAILY NAIK, IST YEAR PG (MS ENT), DEPARTMENT OF ENT, MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVT.OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 2. THE VICE PRINCIPAL, MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM-695 011. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, MEDICAL COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM-695 011. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM-695 011. 5. DIRECTOR OF INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, THYCAUD, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No. 6327 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the Ist March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The grievance of the petitioner is that the direction given by this Court as per Ext.P6 judgment to consider the claim of the petitioner to refund the amount of ` 5 lakhs covered by a bond executed in favour of the respondents is not properly considered while passing Ext.P7 order. 2 The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents points out that the idea and understanding of the petitioner are quite wrong. The issue was very much considered by the Director of Medical Education pursuant to Ext.P6 judgment and Ext.P7 order has been passed on 17.2.2011, of course referring to the relevant provisions in the prospectus. It is stated that by virtue of clause No.XIII (2) (a) of the PG Medical Prospectus 2010, "If a Post Graduate student discontinues the P.G course after the final Centralised allotment Process he/she shall pay Rs.5 lakhs as Liquidated Damages and also refund the stipend/salary already received" W.P (C) No. 6327 of 2011 2 3. In view of the said position and since the said provision in the prospectus is not under challenge, the petitioner is not entitled to challenge Ext.P7 any further, submits the learned Government Pleader. 4. This Court finds considerable force in the submission made by the learned Government Pleader and holds that no interference is warranted with regard to Ext.P7 order. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given some breathing time to discharge the liability in a phased manner . This Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to clear the liability by way of 'six' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 31.3.2011 to be followed by the subsequent instalments to be effected on or before the last working day of the succeeding months. 6. Subject to the above, all further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P7 shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the liability as W.P (C) No. 6327 of 2011 3 above, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. It is further made clear that the petitioner shall be relieved on satisfaction of the first installment; simultaneously furnishing a 'bond' as to the satisfaction of the respondents as to the balance amount payable. Writ Petition is disposed of, as above. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge