KU G SREENIVASULU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) While deciding the Writ Petition, this Court gave a specific direction that the petitioner and the candidates placed above her in the order of merit should be called upon within two weeks to present themselves before the Principal. It was also stated therein that if the other candidates do not turn up, the petitioner shall be admitted.
(2.) This direction was given as early as Ist July, 1971. The learned Government Pleader, it would appear, has communicated this direction to the Director of Medical Services. There was therefore, no want of knowledge of the direction that was to be implemented or of the time within which compliance was made imperative.
(3.) Notwithstanding this specific direction and the communication of the direction to the authority concerned, it is distressing to note that there has been want of compliance with the direction. It is only in rare cases where this Court deems it necessary in the interests of justice, that a time limit is set for the implementation of the directions given under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the present case, the need for compliance arose because the Writ Petition related to admission of a student to the Medical College. It is obvious that there should be no undue delay in such matters, because of the handicap to which the student will be subjected, as a result of the delayed implementation. The candidates should know whether he or she stands a chance of admission and if the result is known, the student concerned might seek other avenues. It was because of the circumstances of this nature that this Court gave a clear direction that certain thing should be done by the authorities within two weeks.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.