Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Samhita Ullod, an Ayurvedic medical student, migrated from Sri B.M. Kankanawadi Ayurveda Mahavidyalaya, Shahpur, Belgaum to the Government Ayurvedic College, Bengaluru. The migration was permitted subject to a condition that she shall not be entitled to receive stipend during the internship period. The petitioner grieved that she was discriminated against because other similarly migrated students were not saddled with such a condition and were permitted to draw the stipend. She filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the Government Order dated 15.3.2013 insofar as it imposed the condition denying stipend. The respondents, represented by the AGA, filed a Statement of Objections opposing the relief on the ground that the petitioner had agreed to the condition and therefore cannot turn around and complain. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the AGA. The court held that the condition was discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as there was no reasonable classification or nexus to any legitimate state interest. The court rejected the estoppel argument, stating that a discriminatory condition cannot be enforced merely because of consent. The court allowed the petition and quashed the condition denying stipend, directing the respondents to treat the petitioner at par with other similarly situated students.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Equality - Article 14 of the Constitution of India - Discrimination - The court considered whether imposing a condition on a migrating Ayurvedic medical student that she shall not be entitled to internship stipend, while other similarly migrated students are permitted stipend, amounts to discrimination. Held that the condition is discriminatory and violative of Article 14, as there is no reasonable classification or nexus to any legitimate state interest. (Paras 1-3) B) Contract Law - Estoppel - Condition Precedent - The respondent argued that the petitioner agreed to the condition and cannot turn around. The court rejected this, holding that a discriminatory condition cannot be enforced merely because of consent, as it offends constitutional guarantees. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a condition imposed on a migrating Ayurvedic medical student denying her internship stipend, while other similarly situated students are allowed stipend, is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the condition in the Government Order dated 15.3.2013 that denied the petitioner internship stipend, directing the respondents to treat the petitioner at par with other similarly situated students.
Law Points
- Discrimination
- Estoppel
- Contractual Condition
- Stipend
- Migration
- Ayurvedic Education
