IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2010 / 20TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30962 of 2010(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DR.GOPAKUMAR. M.K, S/O.M.S. KUNJAN PILLAI, AGED 41 YEARS, PHYSICIAN, THALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, KODUNGALOOR, THRISSUR, RESIDING AT SREEHARI, PERUMPILLY CHURCH ROAD, NJARACKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 505. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HEALTH SERVICE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 3. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 011. 4. DR.ANILKUMAR, ABHILASH, PELA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, PIN-690 103. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 30962 of 2010 U ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 12th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is working as a Physician in the Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Kodungallur in Thrissur district. By Ext.P2, he applied for admission to PG Super Specialty Course, 2010. Ext.P3 is the prospectus. Counselling was held on 10-08-2010. Petitioner did not appear for the counselling. He represented for another chance. 2. Complaining that the representation was not considered, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.28285/2010. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P10 judgment dated 22-09-2010, directing consideration of his representation. Accordingly, the request was considered and rejected by Ext.P1 order, mainly relying on clause X(A)(ii) of the prospectus which provided that candidates who do not turn up for the allotment at the place and time notified will forfeit their chance for admission and will not be considered for admission in future or arising vacancies, irrespective of the WPC.30962/10 : 2 : rank. 3. In this writ petition, petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P1 and seeks an order to require the second respondent to admit the petitioner to vacancies which arose due to non- joining of the allotted candidates. The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, appearance for counselling is not a mandatory requirement and that even if a candidate has failed to appear, such failure cannot result in the forfeiture of his candidature. I am not persuaded to accept this contention in the light of clause X(A)(ii) of Ext.P3 prospectus referred to above. A reading of this provision shows that a candidate, who has failed to appear, will forfeit his chance for admission and will not be considered for admission against future or arising vacancies. This prospectus binds not only the petitioner but also the respondents. If that be so, consequent on the admitted failure of the petitioner to appear for counselling on 10-08-2010, he lost all his claims based on Ext.P2 application made by him for admission to PG course. WPC.30962/10 : 3 : 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner then referred me to clause VI(a)(2) of the prospectus and contended that if sufficient number of candidates are not available, the authorities are bound to consider persons who have lesser qualifications. 5. Having regard to the failure of the petitioner to appear for counselling, since he has lost all his claims for admission, petitioner cannot claim the benefit of clause VI(a) (2) of the prospectus. In that view of the matter, even if the admissions have not given to lesser qualified persons, petitioner can have no grievance. In addition to all these, it has also come out that even the non-joining vacancies have now been filled up and those persons, who will be afforded if this contention is accepted, are not parties to this writ petition. I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks