The Madras High Court in the case Pooja Chakravarthy v TN MGR Medical College observed and has directed the Medical College Hospital and Research Institute for depositing 2.76 crore rupees, wherein it alleged collecting as capitation fees or donation from the students who were admitted following due procedure, into a joint account of authorities.
The plea was moved by seven students against an order of the Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University wherein asking the institute to discharge nine students which include the petitioners from pursuing the MBBS degree course.
The bench headed by Justice R Suresh Kumar in the case observed and has directed the college to open a separate bank account jointly in the name of the Secretary of Selection Committee as well as the Registrar of the University so that it can be used for giving scholarships to meritorious students admitted to the first year in the 2023-2024 academic year.
Adding to it, the court stated that the university and the Selection Committee will decide as to whom such benefit shall be given.
The petitioner in the plea submitted before the court that the students were admitted into the Institute in stray vacancies on the last date of admission. Further, the University in the case denied Hall tickets for these students at the time of their first-year MBBS Examination which led the institute to approach the court.
Further, the High Court denied the plea while observing that the admissions were made without recourse to the Selection Committee and thus were against the regulation.
The petitioner in the plea stated that though multiple rounds of litigation were carried out, they were not made a party to any of them even though the High Court had ordered the Institute to implead the students.
Further, it has also been submitted before the court that when an SLP was filed by the students, thus, the Supreme Court gave them the liberty to approach the high court.
However, the court stated that the National Medical Commission is free to take any action against the college for violating its regulations. It has also been stated by the said court that the petitioners are permitted to pursue the course in the 3rd respondent College, therefore, the order impugned of the first respondent need not be given effect to.
The counsel, Mr.R.Viduthalai Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Rajendiran appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, Mr.S.Wilson Standing Counsel, Mr.J.Ravindran, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Ms.M.Sneha, Standing Counsel, Mr.G.Masilamani, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Vishnu Venkatesh, : Ms.Shubhaanjani Ananth Standing Counsel represented the Respondent.