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

1998 Supreme(AP) 429

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : A.HANUMANTHU, D.REDDAPPA REDDY
P.Chinnayya - Appellant
Versus
Nitesh Narayan - Respondent
Decided On : 07-17-98

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions) Order, 1974 - Constitution of India - clauses (1) and (2) of Article 371-D - A. P. Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission into Under-Graduate Professional Courses through Common Entrance Test) Rules, 1993 - Rule 6 – ADMISSION to MBBS course - Professional Education – Common entrance Test - Admission - Legality of the process of selection adopted in the recounselling done pursuant to the directions of the learned single Judge that resulted in denial of admission to 63 or 64 BC candidates who were admitted into different medical colleges in the State basing on the selection made in the first counselling since it is stated by the learned Advocate-General appearing for the Government of Andhra Pradesh and UHS that these candidates have already been given admission as per interim directions – Held, "while allotting the seats in each individual college the selection committee shall see that the reservation categories and OC categories are maintained as per the percentage of reservations as far as possible. " In this process, it becomes imperative to allot local candidates and open candidates to each individual college proportionate to the number of seats available in such individual college. In other words, at the stage of allotting the candidates from out of the lists prepared as per Rule 6 (1) (b), (d) and (e) to each individual college it is mandatory that the selection committee or the competent authority shall see that 85% of the seats in such college are filled with local candidates and the remaining 15% unreserved seats with open candidates subject to observance of rules of reservations for S. C. , S. T. , and B. C. , communities and other reserved categories specified in clause (b) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8. We are, thus, of the considered view that such procedure alone would be just and proper for filling up seats in each individual college and any other mode would result in breach of rules regulating region-wise reservation of seats as well as the rules governing the reservation of SC, ST, and BC communities and others – Disposed of

D. REDDEPPA REDDI, J.

( 1 ) THE common order dated 11-12-1997 of G. Bikashapathi, J. made in W. P. No. 23481/97 and batch, setting aside the admissions made by the University of Health Sciences (UHS) to the 1st year M. B. B. S. course for the academic year 1997-98 and directing the UHS represented by its Registrar and the Chairman, Under-graduate Admissions Committee, UHS, the respondents in the writ petitions, to make admissions for the same with the following directions : 1. The Common Entrance Test Committee shall forthwith prepare a merit list in accordance with Rule 6 of the A. P. Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission into Under-Graduate Professional Courses through Common Entrance Test) Rules, 1993 notified in G. O. Ms. No. 184, Education EO-II dated 20-8-1993 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2. The competent authority namely the University of Health Sciences shall prepare similar lists as contained in Rule 6 (1), (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) in respect of the candidates who applied for admission to Government/university Professional Colleges and Private Professional Colleges. 3. The competent authority shall make admissions to MBBS course reserving 85% scats to locals institution-wise subject to the community reservations and other non-statutory reservations made under the Admission Rules by the State Government. The competent authority shall also make admission separately to 15% unreserved seats institution-wise duly subjecting them to similar reservations as applicable to 85% local candidates. 4. In respect of State-wide institutions, 85% of available seats should be filled up by the concerned local area candidates in Andhra University area, Osmania University area and S. V. University area in the ratio of 42:36:22 subject to State reservations and 15% scats left open as unreserved seats shall be filled separately duly subjecting to State reservations. 5. In respect of private professional institutions, the relevant rule as applicable shall be followed duly observing the rules of reservations both in respect of free seats and payment seats subject to modifications mentioned in sub-rule (15) of Rule 7 of the Admission Rules in respect of Non-Resident Indians. 6. The admissions shall be made on the basis of merit ranking. They shall be made first to the local candidates in relation to relevant local area. Thereafter the admissions shall be made under unreserved quota after pooling up the unfilled seats if any local quota both OC and reserved categories. 7. In case of reserved candidates qualifying on merit for admission in OC category, the admissions shall be made on the basis of principles settled by the Supreme Court in Slate of Bihar and others v. M. Neethi Chandra and others, (1996) 6 SCC 36. 8. In case of any doubt which may arise on account of implementation of the Rules of Admission or Presidential Order, it is open for the Health University to bring it to the Notice of the Government which shall consider the same and tender proper advice. 9. This exercise shall be done within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is also appropriate for the State Government to oversee the admissions and if necessary place at the disposal of the Health University, the services of competent persons if sought by the Health University to accomplish the time bound schedule. 10. For the purpose of proper counselling the authorities shall give wide publicity for the information of candidates through various news papers apart from Radio and Television net work. is questioned in this batch of writ appeals by some of those who were admitted into different medical colleges in the State as per the first counselling, but denied admission to the same in the second counselling held pursuant to the directions mentioned above. Others have chosen to file the present writ petitions questioning the cancellation of admissions given to them as p





















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