ORDER :- This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution arises out of implementation of the decision rendered by this Court in Dr. Pradeep Jains case (1984) 3 SCR 942 :

2. The petitioner is an unsuccessful candidate for admission to the Post Graduate Medical courses in the All India Entrance Examination held by the all India Institute of Medical Sciences, Respondent No. 2. In this application he has asked for a declaration that clauses 11 and 15(g) of the Bulletin of Information published by respondent No. 2 in regard to the Post Graduate Medical. courses are illegal, unconstitutional and incompetent. He has also asked for a writ of certiorari to quash the list of successful candidates for admission in the Post Graduate Medical colleges within the 25 per cent reserved quota and for a writ of mandamus to the respondents to admit the petitioner and similarly placed other candidates against the 1500 and odd seats left out due to the arbitrary decision/action of the respondents. In Dr. Pradeep Jains case (supra) this court decided that admission to 25 per cent of the seats in the different Post Graduate courses in the medical colleges located in the States and Union Territories as also those run by public authorities should be filled up by an All India Entrance examination. Under the Courts directions made from time to time, a scheme was evolved by the Union of India in co-ordination with the Indian Medical Council and the States Governments, universities and medical institutions. This Court approved the scheme and directed that the same should be implemented from the Academic Year 1988-89 by holding an All India Entrance Examination by the respondent No. 2. The scheme contained the provision that the cut-off base for selection for admission shall be 50 per cent marks. The bulletin prepared by the respondent No. 2 is on the basis of the scheme. Since the bulletin is in accordance with the scheme approved by this Court, and the examination has been held following the terms thereof the petitioner is not entitled to the first two reliefs claimed by him, namely, quashing of a part of the bulletin and quashing of the list of selected candidates. We would like to make it clear that there is no tenable challenge against the examination. It is well settled that judicial determination is not to be tested by the touch stone of Article 14 of the Constitution.

3. Since the matter has come before this Court and from the facts disclosed in the petition we find that in the very first year of implementing the scheme, a stalemate has arisen, we think it appropriate to give certain directions which may, in the facts and circumstances, be appropriate and adequate to meet the situation to the extent possible.

4. We gather that 25 percent reservation as envisaged by the scheme would mean about 2050 to 2100 seats and these were intended to be filled up by the selection test to be conducted by the respondent No. 2. It is said that about 30,000 candidates appeared at the selection test but the respondent No. 2 found only 500 students fit, strictly in terms of the scheme for being admitted as against the 25 per cent reservation. As a result of this about 1600 seats could not be filled up in terms of the scheme.

5. The question for consideration is as to whether these unfilled seats should revert back to the respective States and/or institutions or what other method should be adopted to fill up the vacancies. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner, and there is total unanimity amongst all the parties that no seat should go unfilled. It is wellknown that our country does not have sufficient number of qualified doctors and every step should, therefore, be taken to turn out as many doctors with Post Graduate qualification as possible. The problem to be resolved, therefore, is as to what method should be adopted to fill up these unfilled reserved seats.

6. We had given a direction to the Union of India to find out the exact position in regard to the