Back
1999(9) Supreme 114
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Assam High Court)
G.B. Pattanaik, M. Srinivasan & S.N. Phukan, JJ.
Dr. Narayan Sharma & Anr. Etc. -Appellants
versus
Dr. Pankaj Kr. Lehkar & Ors. etc. -Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 5242-5243 of 1998
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 5244-5245 of 1998
With
Civil Appeal No. 5246 of 1998
Decided on 3-11-1999
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : P.K. Goswami, Sr. Advocate, (Satvik Verma,) Advocate for Kailash Vasdev, Advocate.
For the State of Assam : Vijay Hansaria, Sunil Kumar Jain, (Subhrajyoti Borthankur,) Advocate for M/s. Jain Hansaria & Co., Advocates.
For the Respondents : G.L. Sanghi, Sr. Advocate, Suresh Ch. Gupta, Ms. Geeta Deka, (A. Guneshwar Sharma) Advocate for Ms. Rekha Pandey, Rajiv Mehta, Anil Shrivastav, Advocate.
A perusal of the North Eastern Council Act, 1971 shows that the functions of the Council include making of recommendations with regard to any matter of common interest in the filed of economic and social planning. There is absolutely no doubt that the candidates belonging to the 5 States of North Eastern region where there is no medical college form a separate class and a reasonable provision for them reserving a few seats in the medical courses is not violative of any of the provisions of the Constitution. Chitra Ghosh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (1970) 1 SCR 413 : Relied on. (Para 27)
(ii) Education-Medical education - Assam Medical Colleges (Regulation of Admission to Post- Graduate Courses) Rules, 1997-Rule 4(ii)-Reservation of seats for teachers - Constitutional validity of-Teachers form a class by them selves-Classification based on intelligible differentia having rational nexus to object of Rule-Reservation valid. (Para 28)
(iii) Education-Medical Education - Assam Medical Colleges (Regulation of Admission to Post-Graduate Courses) Rules, 1997-Rule 4(iv)-Reservation of seates for doctors appointed in State Health Services - Constitutional validity of-Rule providing that seates would reserved for doctors who worked at least 5 years in health centre/institution which is not situated in municipal area-Rule not valid-Rural element does not make it a class-Sub-rule (iv) unconstitutional and void. (State of U.P. v. Pradip Tandon, (1975) 1 SCC 267 : Relied on; Dinesh Kumar, (1986) 3 SCC 727 : Relied on.) (Para 29)
(iv) Education-Medical education-Etrance examination-Exemption from-Assam Medical Colleges (Regulation of Admission to post Graduate Courses) Rules, 1977-Rule 5(1) r/w Rule 4(ii) and 4(iii)-Rule exempting NEC candidates and teachers from appearing for entrance examination-Constitution validity-Rule 5(i) in so far as as it exempts NEC candidate unconstitutional and strelek down accordingly-Rule exempting teachers valied.
Reservation can be provided only on the basis of merit which can be assessed by the performance of the candidates in the entrance examination. The NEC cannot choose any candidate according to its whims and fancies. The NEC has t0 recommend candidates only in accordance with the rank secured in the entrance examination. Hence, the provision in Rule 5(i) exempting the candidates referred to in sub-rule (ii) of Rule 4 from appearing in the entrance examination has been rightly struck down by the High Court. (Para 30)
As regards the teachers, there is no need for them to participate in the entrance examination as they have been constantly in touch with the subject/discipline for which reservatin is made. The concept of entracne examination was evolved for the purpose of prescribing uniform standard for judging all the candidates. It has also been repeatedly emphasised by this Court that merit should be the criterion for admission to Post-graduate courses. Both the tests will be satisfied in the case of teachers who have been working in the medical colleges of Assam for the required number of years. Hence, there is no necessity for them to appear in the entrance examination. The rule in so far as it exempts the teachers from appearing in the entrance examination is valid. (Para 31)
Rule 5(i) is unconstitutional and not valid in so far as it exempts the candidates referred to in sub-rules (ii) and (iv) of Rule 4 from appearing in the entrance examination. (Para 34)
(v) Assam Medical Colleges (Regulation of Admission to post Graduate Courses) Rules, 1997-Rule 8(vii)-Proviso to sub-rule (vii)-Proviso only discretionary and not mandatory-Proviso and Rule valied. (Para 23)
(vi) Education-Medical education-Admission to Reservation of seates-General principles.
The following principles emerges from the earlier decisions of the Supreme Court:
(a) A provision for reservation must be within reasonable limits.
(b) There can be a reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia for the purpose of Articles 15(1), 15(4) and 29(2).
(c) There can be reservation for persons belonging to areas which are socially and educationally backward.
(d) A rural ara is not a class by itself and cannot be considered to be socially and educationally backward merely because it is a rural area.
(e) Admission to post-graduate courses should be strictly based on merit.
(f) The merits of the candidates seeking admission to higher educational courses shall be judged by uniform standard and for that purpose holding an entrance examination is the best method.
(g) There shall be no dilution of standards in higher educational courses and in particular, post-graduate courses.
(Para 24)
JUDGMENT
M. Srinivasan, J.-These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Gauhati High Court in Civil Rule No. 3493/97 and 3544/97, both being writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Civil Rule No. 3493/97 was filed by respondents 1-25 in Civil Appeal Nos. 5242-43/98. Civil Rule No. 3544/97 was filed by respondents 26-42 in the said appeals. The appellants in the said appeals were not parties in either of the writ petitions in the High Court. Respondents 43, 43A, 44 and 45 in the said appeals were respondents 1-4 in Civil Rule No. 3493/97 and respondents 43, 43A and 44 were the respondents in Civil Rule No. 3544/97. We find it convenient to refer to the parties as arrayed in Civil Appeal Nos. 5242-5243/98.
2. The respondents 1-25 challenged in their writ petition the validity of Rules 4,5 and 8(vii) of the Assam Medical Colleges (Regulation of the Admission to the Post-Graduate Courses) Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ) on several grounds. Respondents 26-42 had in their writ petition prayed for a direction to allow them to appear in the entrance examination for the Session 1996-97 and that they should be admitted only on the basis of the performance and merit in the entrance examination. They prayed for issue of a writ quashing the corrigendum issued by the Director of Medical Education in the Educational Notice dated 11.7.1997 whereby the candidtes referred to in sub-rules (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of Rule 4 of the Rules were exempted from appearing in the entrance examination.
3. The Government of Assam framed in February 1995 the Assam Medical Colleges (Regualtion of Admission to Post-Graduate Courses) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 1994 Rules ) under Article 166 of the Constitution of India regulating admissions to the Post-graduate courses in the medical colleges of Assam. Rule 5 of the said Rules provided for eligibility for competitive examination. Rule 7 provided for scheme of selection and provisions were made for reservation. In 1997, the earlier Rules were superceded and the Rules were framed. The Rules came into force w.e.f. 1.7.1997. Rule 4 provides for reservation. Sub-rule (i) relates to All India quota seats being 25 of the total seats. Sub-rules (ii), (iii) and (iv) which are under challenge read as follows :
"4. Reservation in seats :
(ii) N.E.C. quota seats : Two seats in degree and two seats in diploma courses shall be reserved for the candidates recommended by the North Eastern Council.
(iii) Teachers Quota seats : Six seats shall be reserved for those teachers who are appointed on a regular basis on the recommendation of the Commission, in any of the Medical Colleges of Assam and who had at least 3 years teaching experience after regular appointment in the subject/discipline for which the seat is available provided that the requirement of teaching experience may be relaxed by a maximum of 1 year in case or pre and para clinical subjects, by the Government.
(iv) State Health Service quota seats: Twenty seats shall be reserved for the doctors appointed in the State Health Services on a regular basis on the recommendation of the Commission and who have worked for at least five years on a regular basis in any Health Centre/Institution which is not situated in a municipal area."
Sub-rules (v) and (vi) are in the following terms :
"(v) Following percentages of the seats available after excluding the seats reserved as referred to in (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) above shall be reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Castes OBC/MOBC candidates :-
S.C. : 7
S.T. (P) : 10
S.T. (H) : 5
OBC/MOBC : 15
(vi) On the date of commencement of these rules, the number of total seats in different disciplines in different colleges and their break up amoung the reserved categories as mentioned
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
