ORDER

1. Leave granted. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. Having regard to the broader considerations of equality of opportunity, this Court directed in Dr Pradeep Jain v. Union of India1 that a certain percentage of seats in the post-graduate medical courses should be made available to the candidates on the basis of All India competition. The percentage was later determined at 25%. In Dr Dinesh Kumar v. Motilal Nehru Medical College2 this Court prescribed a schedule for the All India competitive examination, which was modified in certain respects in Dr Dinesh Kumar v. Motilal Nehru Medical College3. In subsequent decisions, this Court has been impressing upon the concerned authorities the necessity of adhering to the time-frame prescribed in the matter of holding All India competitive examination and for making admissions.

3. According to the system in vogue, a candidate who applies for admission in the All India quota is required to indicate eight medical colleges and six subjects, in the order of preference, to which he seeks admission. There are seventy medical colleges/institutions and forty specialities. The post-graduate courses comprise degree courses as well as diploma courses. After the results of examinations are published, the admissions are made on the basis of merit-cum-preference-cum-eligibility with the aid of a computer. In the first instance, a list of admissions is issued. But it so happens that for one or the other reason, many of the candidates in the list do not turn up to join the course. Hence, a second list is issued and then a third. But while preparing the second list or the third list, the overall merit-cum-preference-cum eligibility is not again examined, with the result that sometimes a candidate with lesser score gets a better subject than a candidate with higher score. We may illustrate what we say. In the first list, a candidate with say 250 marks is allotted a seat in M.S. (General Surgery) and a candidate with 225 marks is allotted a seat in M.S. (Opthalomology). Now for some reason, the candidate allotted a seat in M.S. (General Surgery) does not join. That seat falls vacant. When the second list is taken up, the candidates available will necessarily be those who have secured less than 225 marks. Since the merit-cum-preference-cum-eligibility is not determined overall again, what happens is that a candidate with 220 marks gets M.S. (General Surgery), while the candidate with 225 marks has to continue in M.S. (Opthalomology), though given a choice, he would very much like to come into M.S. (General Surgery). That there have been many such instances, is beyond dispute and has been commented upon by the Kerala High Court in the judgment under appeal. Besides the above, there is yet another circumstance. In spite of promptings from this Court, the authorities in charge of holding All India competitive examination have not been able to adhere to the prescribed schedule. In such a situation, it is bound to happen that issuance of second and third lists delay the process of admission still further. By the time the second and third lists are communicated, half the course is over. This aspect has been agitating us while hearing this appeal.

4. We have, therefore, discussed this matter thoroughly with Shri V.R. Reddy, Additional Solicitor General for the respondents. He, in turn, discussed the matter with the concerned authorities and has placed before us a modified scheme for allotment of the candidates declared successful in All India post-graduate entrance examination for admission to M.D./M.S./Diploma and M.D.S. courses. We must make it clear that the modification which we are proposing herewith is only with respect to the procedure to be followed in the matter of making admission and is designed to eliminate unequal results and the delay mentioned above. In the place of present requirement of a candidate indicating his preference for eight colleges and six subjects, on the basis of which admissions a