Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION [C] No. 26563 of 2008
National Board of Examinations … Petitioner
Vs.
Gaurav Khanna & Ors. … Respondents
O R D E R
The National Board of Examinations (‘the Board’ for
short) has filed this SLP being aggrieved by the interim
order dated 24.7.2008 passed by the High Court directing:
(i) the second respondent College to receive the thesis
submitted by the first respondent forthwith in respect of
DNB in Anesthesiology and forward it to the Board; (ii) the
second respondent to permit the first respondent to sit in
the appraisal as and when the same is held; and (iii) the
Board to accept the application form of the first
respondent for appearance in the final examination for the
DNB programme. On 24.10.2008, this Court stayed ( ex parte )
the said interim order dated 24.7.2008.
2
2. Learned counsel for the Board submitted that the
second respondent college did not have recognition during
the relevant period. The first respondent’s counsel on the
other hand, contended that the college had accreditation up
to 31.12.2006 that there was legitimate expectation that
the accreditation would be continued from 1.1.2007, but the
accreditation had been continued only from January, 2008.
The case of the first respondent (writ petitioner) is that
the accreditation should be with effect from 1.1.2007.
3. We are informed by the learned counsel for the first
respondent that the examination for DNB in anesthesia is to
th
be held on 13 December, 2008.
4. The writ petition is still pending. The writ petition
has been ordered to be listed for final hearing within six
months of the order dated 24.7.2008. The said order dated
24.7.2008 is only an interim arrangement to ensure that the
first respondent does not lose a year of his career in the
event of his ultimate success in the writ petition.
Therefore, we do not propose to interfere with the
3
discretion exercised by the High Court in granting the
interim relief.
5. We, however, make it clear that compliance with the
directions given in the said interim order, by the second
respondent or the Board will not create any equities in
favour of the first respondent, in the event of ultimate
failure in the writ petition. We also make it clear that
the Board may withhold the results of the first respondent
till the writ petition is finally disposed of and then
abide by the final decision. We request the High Court to
endeavour to dispose of the writ petition within six months
from 24.7.2008, as directed in its order dated 24.7.2008.
6. Our attention was drawn to several documents to
contend that the first respondent did not participate in
the DNB programme in the manner required. It is open to the
Board to bring all these facts to the notice of the High
Court at the final hearing of the writ petition.
7. The interim order dated 24.10.2008 in this case is
vacated and the special leave petition is dismissed. The
impleadment application is also dismissed as withdrawn.
_________________J.
4
(R. V. Raveendran)
New Delhi; _________________J.
December 8, 2008. (D. K. Jain)