Madhya Pradesh High Court Permits Students Of Unsuited Nursing Colleges To Participate In Examination
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has permitted students of unsuited Nursing Colleges to participate in the examination.
Law Students Association had filed a writ petition against the State seeking permission to write the exam.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi and Justice Achal Kumar Paliwal said, “On careful consideration of the documents made appendage to this application, it transpires that these students had borne the brunt of the responsibility when regular government staff took to their heels. Further, these students are not graduates and their mental status cannot be equated with the students who are graduate nor are they come in the circumference of students whom the Supreme Court had repelled to favour. Thus, we are of the opinion that the order dated 08.02.2024 is modified to the extent that students of unsuited colleges shall also be permitted to participate in the examination, but this arrangement and benefit would be a one-time-measure and if they do not clear the examination, no further benefit shall be given to them.”
Senior Advocate Naman Nagrath represented the petitioners while Advocate General Prashant Singh represented the respondents. Senior Advocate Hemant Shrivastava represented the intervenors.
The counsel for the applicants submitted that the colleges were enlisted as 'deficient' in the CBI report, but they were necessary party to the proceedings.
The High Court observed, “I.A.No.2564/2024 filed in W.P.No.22164/2023 by respondent No.3 seeking clarification in the order dated 13.02.2024 to the extent that finding recorded for regularizing the Session 2023-24 was in fact related to Session 2022-23 because as per respondent No.3 Session 2023-24 has already been proposed to be declared zero-year by the respondent/University.”
The counsel for the applicants said that the declaration of session 2023-24 as zero-year by M.P. Medical Science University (MPMSU) is precarious for the reason that the University is not the authority to take such a decision and this decision is neither taken by the State Government nor by the Nursing Council, therefore, question of modification of order does not arise.
“As per Shri Nagrath, the Court has passed infallible order that too in consonance with the reliefs claimed by the petitioner in his petition. Albeit, MPMSU has sent such proposal to the State Government but the State Government has not yet acted thereupon and now it is for the State to decide whether declaration of Session 2023-24 as zero-year is proper or not and if yes, then further sessions could be regularised or not. He accentuates that Nursing Council has already given its approval that last date of admission can be extended and as such declaration of zero-year would also cause great loss to the colleges which are otherwise found suitable”, the Court noted.
The Court further said that on the face of decision taken by MPMSU primarily, if permission is accorded for admission, then it would be arduous for the colleges to complete other formalities under which students are required to attend minimum period of classroom teaching and practical teaching.
“… we deem it proper to keep the ball in the court of State Government to take decision either-way on the proposal of MPMSU and accordingly, this court will give its verdict. For the present, Session 2023-24 mentioned in the order dated 13.02.2024 shall be read as Session 2022-23. Thus, we allow the suited colleges to start enrollment of students for the Session 2022-23. The decision with regard to Session 2023-24 shall be taken by this Court after the decision is taken by the State Government on the proposal made by MPMSU”, it ordered.
Accordingly, the High Court listed the matters on March 20, 2024.
Cause Title- Law Students Association v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Appearance:
Petitioners: Senior Advocate Naman Nagrath, Advocates Alok Vagrecha, Deepak Tiwari, Anshuman Singh, and Jubin Prasad.
Respondents: Advocate General Prashant Singh, Additional Advocate General Bharat Singh, Advocates Abhijeet Awasthi, Mohan Sausarkar, Sudhir Kumar Sharma.
Intervenors: Senior Advocate Hemant Shrivastava, Advocates D.K. Bilaiya, Kapil Duggal, Jagat Singh, S. Hazari, Pramod C. Nair, and Varidhi Pathak.
