1 SpotLaw Devasmita Chakraborty & Others v. State of West Bengal & Others (Supreme Court Of India) HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ALTAMAS KABIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASTI CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN Civil Appeal No. 440 -41 Of 2013 (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17691 -92 Of 2012) | 16 -01 - 2013 1. Leave granted. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 16 -5-2012, passed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Devasmita Chakraborty v. State of W.B. ((2012) 2 Cal LT 507) challenging the order of the lear ned Single Judge, rejecting the appellants’ prayer to pass interim orders regarding the acceptance of their registration forms. 2. The writ petitioners, who are the appellants herein, are students who were admitted in the MBBS course in the medical colleg e established by the Indian Centre for Advancement of Research and Education under the name and style of “ICARE”, pursuant to the affiliation granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences on 18 -8-2010. It appears that the essentiality certificate, w hich had been granted, was subsequently withdrawn on 16 -11 -2011, as also the order dated 28 -11 -2011, passed by the University withdrawing its consent to affiliation. On 9 -12 -2011 the Medical Council of India also withdrew its letter of permission. Conseque ntly, the appellants, who had been admitted to the MBBS course, were not allowed to register their names for appearing for the examination for the academic session 2011 -2012. 3. The appellants’ prayer for interim relief had been rejected, both in the writ petition as also in the appeal. The present appeals were filed by the students and, in the pending special leave petitions, an interim order was passed on 25 -5-2012 (Devasmita Chakraborty v. State of W.B. (2014) 13 SCC 706), to the following effect: “... Looking to the facts and features of the case, we grant permission to the petitioners to appear in the aforesaid examination, subject to their depositing the requisite fees and completion of requisite attendance, as contemplated under the relevant rules a nd regulations. They would be allowed to appear in the examination, but their results would not be declared and be kept in sealed covers and they would not claim any equity in their favour. The respondents are directed to accept the petitioners’ concerned forms and fees and issue admit card at the earliest to enable them to appear in the examination.” 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid interim order, the appellants were allowed to participate in t he first year examination, but their results have been withheld in terms of the above order. IAs Nos. 11 -12 of 2012 were, thereafter, filed in the special leave petitions, inter alia, for a direction upon the respondents 2 SpotLaw concerned to declare the results of the appellants for the first year MBBS examination, which was conducted by Respondents 5 and 6, and the results have been kept in a sealed cover, pursuant to the directions of this Court. 5. While the special leave petitions were pending in this Court an d after the interim order! had been passed, the writ petition was taken up for disposal by the Calcutta High Court and, by judgment and order dated 1 -8-2012 (Indian Centre for Advancement of Research and Education v. State of W.B., W.P. No.2030 of 2012, de cided on 1 -8-2012 (Cal)), the High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders by which the essentiality certificate had been withdrawn by the State of West Bengal, the withdrawal of consent by the university and the withdrawal of the permissi on letter by the Medical Council of India to establish the Medical College. By the said judgment, the High Court also directed the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue the MBBS course commenced for the academic session 2011 -2012 and to see that the students found no difficulty in pursuing their studies. The said order was made subject to the condition that the fees to be charged would be decided by a Committee, which had been set up by the High Court, known as the “Bisi Committee”, headed by a r etired Judge of the Calcutta High Court. 6. Understandably, the State of West Bengal has preferred an appeal against the said order of the learned Single Judge and the matter is now pending before the Division Bench of the High Court. Admittedly, an appli cation was made before the Division Bench for stay of the operation of the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, hut the same was refused. Subsequently, the appellants herein have prayed for a direction on the respondents concerned for declaration of their results. 7. Having heard Mr. P.P. Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant students, Mr. Altaf Ahmed and Mr. R.S. Suri for the college and the society concerned, as also Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee, appearing for the State of West Be ngal, Mr. Soumitra Chowdhuri, appearing for the University, and Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, appearing for the Medical Counsel of India, we are of the view that, since the writ petition has succeeded and specific directions have been given which though pending in ap peal, have not been stayed, it would be in the interests of justice that the prayers made in IAs Nos. 11 -12 of 2012, as also the appeals themselves, should be disposed of. 8. Accordingly, we allow the appeals and IAs Nos. 11 -12 of 2012 as also IAs Nos. 13 -14 of 2013 and direct that the results of the examination taken by the appellants in respect of the first year MBBS course for the Academic Session 2011 -2012, which has been kept in a sealed cover, as directed, be declared forthwith. 9. Incidentally, it may be indicated that a writ petition, being WP No. 4481 of 2012, which had been filed by the students regarding their admission into the first year MBBS course has been partially allowed by the High court and one of the issues involved has been referred t o the larger Bench and the said matter is still pending. We make it clear that we are not expressing any views as far as the pending matter is concerned and the same may be decided on its own merits. There will be no order as to costs. 3 SpotLaw