Karnataka High Court Directs College To Pay ₹15 Lakh To Student Wrongfully Denied Admission To MBBS Course Despite Paying Fee

The Karnataka High Court directed Sri Siddartha Academy of Higher Education a deemed to be University running Sri Siddhartha Medical College to pay Rs. 15 Lakh as compensation to a student for denying her admission to the MBBS course for academic year 2017-18, despite her paying fee for the first year within time. 

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice K Manmadha Rao held thus while disposing of a petition filed by a student Sanjana V Tumkur.

“We notice that the instant case was one where the writ petitioner was not at fault and it was only on account of the illegal demand raised by respondent No.6 that she was unable to join a MBBS Course in the Academic Year 2017-2018. She had paid the first year fees before the prescribed date, she had also provided the Bank Guarantee immediately thereafter, that is, on 08.09.2017. Hence, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case, where compensation should be awarded to the petitioner by respondent No.6 College for the denial of admission for the year 2017-2018.”

The petitioner claimed that she secured All India Rank in NEET-2017 and had participated in the counseling conducted by the College on 01.09.2017 for admission to the MBBS Course for the academic year 2017-18. She had submitted all original academic certificates to the college and a Demad Draft dated 01.09.2017 of Rs.15,65,750/- towards first year fees.

However, neither the petitioner was given an acknowledgment nor an allotment letter, but orally assured admission. On 05.09.2017, the petitioner was informed by the Principal of the college that a Bank Guarantee for the balance course fees was required.

Although the petitioner submitted a Bank Guarantee of Rs.52,50,000 on 08.09.2017, however, the College refused to accept it stating that all seats had been filled and the admission list had already been sent to the Medical Council Of India, with the last date of admission having lapsed.

The students who have secured NEET-2017 ranking lower than that of the petitioner came to be admitted to the MBBS Course. The Chancellor of the University acknowledging the error committed by the college had issued a letter dated 11.10.2017, assuring the petitioner a free medical seat from the management quota for the academic year 2018-19, for the entire course of 4 1/2 years without any fees.

Later, she secured admission in Basaveshwara Medical College, submitted a representation dated 18.06.2018 to respondents No.6 and 7, requesting for meeting the earlier commitment of payment of entire medical fees.

The respondents opposed the petition submitting that the petitioner has delayed in initiating the legal proceedings, filing this Writ Petition only on 07.02.2018, six months after the alleged denial of admission in September 2017. It is contended that the University and the College have no record of the document allegedly signed by the Chancellor.

The respondents claimed that this document was fabricated solely for the purpose of litigation, and if it was indeed signed it may have been under threat and coercion.

Further it was argued that the request for allotment of a medical seat in any other College without payment of fees is untenable and beyond the jurisdiction of this Court and that Supreme Court and High Court have consistently held that no admissions are permissible after the statutory cut-off date. They claimed that the petitioner failed to secure admission within that timeframe, and therefore the Institution cannot be held at fault.

The bench on going through the records said “The learned counsel for the respondents have been unable to show us any provision in the prospectus, the Act or in any other binding document providing that a Bank Guarantee in respect of the fees for the entire duration of the course must be provided to the Educational Institution concerned before admission is to be provided.”

It observed that there was no apprehension of the petitioner discontinuing the course half way through as she had reported for admission and had paid the fees for the first year. When she was asked to deposit balance course fee, the court noted, she submitted a bank guarantee. 

“In the absence of any provision in the prospectus, the admission notification, the statutes governing admissions or anywhere else that the production of the Bank Guarantee for the entire course period was required for admission, the action of respondent No.6 in having denied to the petitioner and having granted the seat to a less meritorious candidate was per se arbitrary and illegal and cannot be excused under any circumstances,” it said. 

The court further said that no complaint had been raised by the Institution or its principal regarding issuance of Chancellor's letter assuring of free medical seat obtained under force and coercion.

"Though the Institution has contended that the document is not genuine, no attempt has been made to establish the said contention in accordance with law," it said. 

Thus it held “We are therefore of the opinion that there was justification in the student having waited to see whether the assurance held out by the chancellor would be honored by the Institution. We therefore cannot accept the contention that there is any undue delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court.”

Allowing the petitioner's plea the court directed that the compensation be paid to the petitioner within two months. 

Case Title: Sanjana V Tumkur AND State of Karnataka & Others

Counsel for petitioner: Advocate Ajoy Kumar Patil

Counsel for R1 and R2: AGA Sudev Hegde

Counsel for R3: CGC Madanan Pillai

Counsel for R5: Advocate N Khetty

Counsel for R6: Advocate Chandrakanth R Goulay

Counsel for R8: Advocate Prasanna Kumar

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.6014 OF 2018

Click Here To Read/Download Order