SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(SC) 76

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.P. MADON AND G.L. OZA, JJ.
Kumari Suneeta Ramchandra, Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra and another, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 628 of 1986
 Decided on 13-3-1986.
Advocates appeared
Mr. V. A. Bobde and Mr. A. G. Ratnaparkhi, Advocates, for Appellant; Mr. A. M. Khanwilkar and Mr. A. S. Bhasme, Advocates, for Respondents.

Advocates:
A.G.Ratnaparkhi, A.M.KHANWILKAR, A.S.BHASME, V.A.BOBDE

Headnote:

Constitution of India – Article 14 and 226 – Medical Colleges of the Government of Maharashtra Rules – Rule 3 - Board of Secondary Education - Service of Central Government – Appellants father, who is in service of Central Government and was working in Geological Survey of India was transferred from Hyderabad in the State of Andhra Pradesh to Nagpur in State of Maharashtra – Appellant passed S.S.C. examination of Board of Secondary Education Andhra Pradesh, in First Division – After coming to Nagpur along with her father she joined Hislop College, Nagpur, from where she passed Examination of Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Education, Nagpur Divisional Board, Nagpur, in First Division this being one of qualifying examinations for admission to medical colleges in State of Maharashtra – Accordingly she applied for admission to M.B.B.S. course at two Government colleges which are at Nagpur Nagpur Medical College and Indira Gandhi Medical College – Held, Interim order passed by this Court one seat in Government Medical College. Nagpur. in M.B.B.S. course had been kept unfilled and Appellant would be entitled to be admitted against that seat – During pendency of Petition for Special Leave to Appeal an affidavit of Under-Secretary to Government of Maharashtra Medical – Education and Drugs Department affirmed was filed before us in which it was stated that Government had reconsidered matter and Dean of Nagpur Medical College had been directed to grant admission to Appellant has thus secured admission she wanted unnecessary for us to consider validity of Rule C(5) except to state that we do not agree with High Court when it has said that there is nothing abhorrent about requirement contained in Rule question of validity of rule C(5) requires careful consideration and it cannot be brushed aside in the manner in which the High Court has done earlier leave this question open – Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

MADON, J.:— This Appeal by Special Leave granted by this Court is directed against the judgment and order of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court whereby the High Court dismissed with no order as to the costs the writ petition under Article, 226 of the Constitution of India (being Writ Petition No. 1683 of 1985) filed by the Appellant seeking admission in the Medical College, Nagpur.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal require to be briefly stated. The Appellants father, who is in the service of the Central Government and was working in the Geological Survey of India, was transferred on March 3, 1983, from Hyderabad in the State of Andhra Pradesh to Nagpur in the State of Maharashtra. In 1983 the Appellant passed the S.S.C. examination of the Board of Secondary Education, Andhra Pradesh, in First Division. After coming to Nagpur along with her father she joined Hislop College, Nagpur, from where she passed in 1985 the H.S.C. (XII Standard) Examination of the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Education, Nagpur Divisional Board, Nagpur, in First Division, this being one of the qualifying examinations for admission to the medical colleges in the State of Maharashtra. Accordingly, she applied for admission to the M.B.B.S. course at the two Government colleges which are at Nagpur, namely, the Nagpur Medical College and the Indira Gandhi Medical College. Under the rules, the application forms for admission to these colleges are to be sent to the Dean, Medical College, Nagpur, who is the Second Respondent before us. She based her claim for admission upon Rule C(6)(ii) of the Medical Colleges of the Government of Maharashtra Rules for Admission, 1985-86 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1985-86 Rules"). Not having secured admission to either of the said two medical colleges. at Nagpur, she filed a writ petition before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court which was dismissed by the High Court negativing the construction sought to be placed upon the said Rule C(6)(ii) by the Appellant. It is against this judgment and order that the present appeal by Special Leave is filed.

3. Though a number of contentions have been raised in the Petition for Special Leave, in view of the interpretation we are placing upon Rule C(6)(ii) of the 1985-86 Rules, it is unnecessary to go into any other question. The 1985-86 Rules are an annexure to the Government of Maharashtra Resolution in the Medical Education and Drugs Department No. MPD-1084/7575/MED-4 dated December 21, 1984. This Resolution shows that the rules for admission into the medical colleges were revised and substituted by the 1985-86 Rules in view of certain judgments of the Bombay High Court, namely, the judgments in Writ Petitions Nos. 1753 of 1982, 2360 of 1983 and 3238 of 1984 and the judgment of this Court in Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India, (1984) 3 SCR 942, relating to reservation of seats in Government medical colleges in the State. Leaving aside unnecessary details, it will be sufficient to state that Rule C(5) provides that in addition to the qualifications set out earlier only those candidates would be eligible for admission to the medical colleges who have passed the S.S.C. or Senior Cambridge or Indian School Certificate or equivalent examination from any of the recognized schools in the Maharashtra State. Rule C(6) contains certain exceptions to Rule C(5). We are concerned in this Appeal with the second exception contained in Rule C(6) (ii). The said Rule C(6)(ii) provides as follows :

"(ii) The sons / daughters of Central Government servants transferred to Maharashtra State from outside the State shall have the concession of exemption from passing the S.S.C. or equivalent examination from Maharashtra State, subject to the condition that the child has passed at least the qualifying examination as defined in Rule C(3) above. The total number of such children of Central Government servants to be admitted with this concession shall not exceed two
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top