N.M. KASLIWAL AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.
Writ Petns. (C) Nos. 493, 456, 381,547,564 and 565 of 1992 with SLP (C) Nos. 9155-56, 9110 & 8528-29 of 1992 with C.A. No. 2950 of 1992 and with SLP (C) Nos. 5621 and 6343 of 1992, D/-11-8-1992.
Dr. Indu Kant Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. Dhirendra Kumar Saxena, Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. Renu Raheja and others, Petitioners
Versus
Secretary, Medical Health, Lucknow and others, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. Neelima Mittal, Petitioner
Versus
Secretary, Medical Health, Lucknow and others, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. Daya Nand Prasad and another, Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and another, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. Rajeev Kishore Saxena, Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and another, Respondents.
WITH
Dr. R.K. Saxena and another, etc etc., Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and others, etc. etc., Respondents.
WITH
State of U.P. and others, Appellants
Versus
Dr. Vijay Tilak, Respondent.
WITH
State of U.P. and others, etc. etc., Petitioners
Versus
Dr. Yogendra Singh, etc. etc., Respondents.
AND WITH
Principal, S.N. Medical College, Agra and another, etc. etc., Petitioners
Versus
Dr. Kavita Shankar Garh and another, etc. etc., Respondents.
Constitution Of Inida,1950 - Article 32 -Post-Graduate Course - Special Leave Petitions - Cases candidates have filed Writ Petitions Constitution directly in Court while in some cases candidates first approached High Court and being unsuccessful in High Court have filed Special Leave Petitions against orders of High Court and there are some Special Leave Petitions filed State of Uttar Pradesh or by Principal of Medical Colleges against orders of High Court where High Court had passed orders in of candidates- Though points raised in all these cases are identical but in some cases notice has not been served on respondent candidates and in some Special Leave Petitions defects pointed out by office have not been removed by petitioners- In view circumstances mentioned above court are stating Writ Petitions filed Doctors Article Constitution and decision in these cases would cover controversy in all these cases –Held, Court have given our thoughtful consideration to entire facts and circumstances of case- Court have already held that rule laying down minimum percentage of marks in entrance examination is valid and no direction can be given State Government to fill up any vacant seats by candidates securing less than minimum qualifying marks- Court had of course made a recommendation to State Government in respect of vacant seats of Post-Graduate Course but court find no valid justification make such recommendation in respect of candidates of earlier years - candidates who had not secured minimum qualifying marks had an opportunity to appear in entrance examination to make up deficiency- Court find justification in difficulties pointed out State Government in doing so- Granting admission to candidates batch now and to allow them to join with batch bound to increase total strength of Post-Graduate students - This would not only be in violation of directions of Medical Council of India but would also put additional financial burden on State Government- In any case State Government itself is vehemently opposing such request made on behalf candidates and court cannot give any direction to State Government in this regard - Order accordingly
Judgement
KASLIWAL, J.:- All the above cases relate to the Doctors who had appeared in the entrance examination of 1990-91 for admission to Post-Graduate Medical Courses of seven medical colleges in the State of Uttar Pradesh. In some of these cases the candidates have filed Writ Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution directly in this Court while in some cases the candidates first approached the High Court and being unsuccessful in the High Court have filed Special Leave Petitions against the orders of the High Court and there are some Special Leave Petitions filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh or by the Principal of the Medical Colleges against the orders of the High Court where the High Court had passed the orders in favour of the candidates. Though the points raised in all these cases are identical but in some cases, the notice has not been served on the respondent candidates and in some Special Leave Petitions the defects pointed out by the office have not been removed by the petitioners. In view of the circumstances mentioned above we are stating the facts of the Writ Petitions filed by the Doctors under Article 32 of the Constitution and decision in these cases would cover the controversy in all these cases.
2. All the above writ Petitions have been filed by the doctors who had appeared in the entrance examination of 1990 and 1991 for admission to Post-Graduate Medical Courses of Medical Colleges in the State of Uttar Pradesh. All the petitioners secured less than 50% marks in the general category and less than 40% marks in the SC/ ST category necessary to qualify for admission to the Post-Graduate Course. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid rules by which the minimum percentage of marks has been kept as 50% for general category and 40% for SC/ ST category. This Court in a recent decision in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dr. Anupam Gupta, AIR 1992 SC 932: (1992 AIR SCW 746) had already held that the prescription of 50% cut off marks for the students of general category and 40% for SC/ STs was valid. The aforesaid decision was affirmed in Writ Petitions (Civil) Nos. 451, 454, 525, 545 of 1992, Ombir Singh v. State of U. P. decided on July 30,1992 (reported in 1992 AIR SCW 3218) and it was held that any challenge to the above rule laying down minimum percentage of marks for eligibility for admission to Post-Graduate Courses was no longer res integra.
3. It was, however, contended on behalf of the petitioners that while deciding the case 0mbir Singh v. State of U. P., (1992 AIR SCW 3218) (supra) relating to the entrance examination for the year 1992, this Honble Court had made a recommendation that the State Government may take suitable steps for redressing the long felt grievance of the doctors to fill up all the seats which remained vacant after the admission of those candidates who had secured the minimum qualifying marks in such entrance examination. It has been submitted that a similar direction may be given in respect of seats which remained vacant in the years 1990 and 1991 also. In this regard it was submitted that the State Government itself in a chart submitted before this Court has admitted that 256 seats remained Vacant in 1990 and 180 seats in 1991. It was further submitted that such direction be given in respect of all those petitioners who have approached this Court or the High Court in this regard.
4. The above prayer has been opposed on behalf of the State Government. It has been submitted on behalf of the State that there is no provision for carrying forward the vacant seats of any particular year to the subsequent years. It has been submitted that if the candidates of 1990 and 1991 batch are admitted now, they will have to join along with 1992 batch and this would increase the total strength of Post-Graduate students for the year 1992. It has been pointed out that the maximum number of seats for Post-Graduate Courses in 1992 is 535 out of which 318 have been filled by the candidates securing mo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.