RIYA GEORGE versus KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ORS.

Citation: [2019] 4 S.C.R. 4 · Decided: 21-02-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 7 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
4
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 4 S.C.R.
RIYA GEORGE
v.
KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1247 of 2018)
FEBRUARY 21, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
Constitution of India – Art.32 – Payment of damages – First
Respondent-medical college admitted petitioner in the MBBS degree
course – Petitioner paid a total fee of Rs.21.65 lakhs to the first
respondent – Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) cancelled
MBBS admissions granted by the first respondent due to non-
compliance with its orders – Petitioner sought refund of the fees
from the first respondent – Pursuant thereto, petitioner received
amount of Rs.20 lakhs but remaining amount of Rs.1.65 lakh was
not paid – Petitioner claimed that she lost one year of education as
a result of the legal proceedings emanating from the cancellation
of the admissions granted by the first respondent and sought payment
of damages – Held: Inappropriate to quantify damages in present
proceedings – Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee had issued
a notice to the petitioner, fixing a hearing for the  purpose of deciding
her claim, amongst the claims of other students – Also, another
Bench of the Supreme Court had issued directions by consent
requiring first respondent to deposit “double the amount” of “the
fees deposited by each one of 150 students” with the college –
However, it left the exact quantification of the amount in each case
to be determined by the Committee – Moreover, in pursuance of the
order, the petitioner has received a notice from the Committee to
appear in support of her claim – Thus, any determination in present
proceedings of the quantum of damages payable to the petitioner
would be contrary to the underlying purpose & object of the order
passed by the coordinate Bench – Petitioner directed to pursue her
claim before the Committee.
The petitioner has moved these proceedings under Article
32 of the Constitution seeking an order for the payment of
damages by the first respondent-medical college.  The basis of
[2019] 4 S.C.R. 4
4
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
5
the claim is that she has lost one year of education as a result of
the legal proceedings emanating from the cancellation of the
admissions granted by the first respondent.  Petitioner submitted
that the first respondent was guilty of violating the regulations
governing the process of admissions. As a result, students have
had to suffer, the petitioner being one among them. Hence, present
Writ Petition.
Disposing of the writ petition, the Court
HELD: 1. It would be inappropriate for this Court to quantify
the damages in the present proceedings as the Admission and
Fee Regulatory Committee has issued a notice to the petitioner
on 28 November 2018, fixing a hearing for the purpose of deciding
upon her claim, amongst the claims of other students.  The
Committee, in its review order dated 29 May 2018 has already
adverted to this aspect. [Paras 25, 26][16-A, B]
2.  Earlier, another two Judge Bench of this Court issued
directions by consent on 29 August 2018 requiring the first
respondent to deposit “double the amount” of “the fees deposited
by each one of 150 students” with the college.  This batch of 150
students includes the petitioner.  Technically, it is true that the
petitioner was not a party to the earlier proceedings and that the
order dated 29 August 2018 is a consent order.  However, any
determination by this Court in the present proceedings of the
quantum of damages payable to the petitioner would be contrary
to the underlying purpose and object of the order passed by the
coordinate Bench.  In the order dated 29 August 2018, the two
Judge Bench laid down the principle – refund of double the
amount of the fee – but left the exact quantification of the amount
in each case to be determined by the Committee. Quantification
of damages in monetary terms in the present writ petition will
have a bearing on the pending proceedings before the Committee.
That proceeding covers the entire batch of 150 students.
Moreover, in pursuance of the order, the petitioner has received
a notice from the Committee to appear in support of her claim.
[Para 26][16-C-E]
3.  There can be no manner of doubt that the petitioner is
entitled to be compensated for the loss of a valuable year which
RIYA GEORGE v. KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 4 S.C.R.
was occasioned by the misdemeanors of the first respondent.  A
student who has been deprived of a valu

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.