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

1990 Supreme(Bom) 142

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.
Nidhi Kumar (Miss) .... Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra and others .... Respondents.
.Writ Petition No. 275 of 1990, decided on 30-3-1990.
Advocates appeared :
R.S. Deshpande, for the petitioner.
S.M. Shah, for Respondents Nos. 1, 8 and 10.
S.C. Dharmadhikari with R.K. Deshpande, for respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
E.P. Bharucha with D.N. Trivedi, for respondents Nos. 4 to 7.
S.J. Vazifdar with Aspi Chinoy and N.E. Sarni, for respondents No. 14.
Ashok Mody i/b Chitnis Vaithy Co., for respondent No. 16.

Headnote:Article 14-Rules prohibiting migration to other Medical Colleges by Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences Sevagram-Whether violative of Article 14 of the Constitution?

       Held - Other institutive may permit such migration hut does not compel the institute in question also to permit migration. There is no violation of Article 14 here. The guidelines issued by the Medical Council of India allow such migration hut that does not have any statutory force.

       

JUDGMENT - Mrs. SUJATA MANOHAR, J.:---Petitioner Nidhi Kumar joined the Mahatma Gandhi Institution of Medical Sciences, Sevagram, Wardha in the State of Maharashtra after completing her 12th Standard Examination. The Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (hereinafter referred to as 'the Medical College' at Wardha conducts a competitive examination for selecting students for admission to the First M.B.B.S. Course. The petitioner appeared for the competitive examination and was selected.

2. She passed her first M.B.B.S. Examination from the Medical College at Wardha sometimes in December 1989. Her marks list bears the date 26th December, 1989'. Thereafter she applied to the Dean of the Medical College, Wardha for 'No Objection Certificate' for her transfer to Bombay in a Medical College at Bombay for the 2nd M.B.B.S. Course. Before the Medical College could take a decision on her application she has filed this petition on 30th January, 1990. This appears to be on account of the fact that the last date for submitting N.O.C. to the Medical Colleges run by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay was 31st January, 1990. In the petition she has prayed that the said Institution which is run by Respondent No. 2-Society be directed to issue 'No Objection Certificate ' to her. She has also challenged the validity of a rule of the said Institute that no application for migration to other Medical College will be entertained from students admitted to that institution.

3. The prospectus for M.B.B.S. 1988-1989 issued by Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sevagram (Wardha) (Respondent No. 3) sets out that it is an institute which trains the students in a rural community setting. It is a rural medical college which serves the villagers. The Institute is located at Sevagram where Mahatma Gandhi and Kasturba lived during the pre-independence struggle. The Institute prescribes a Code of Conduct for students which, inter alia, requires students to take vegetarian meals, wear Khadi and lead a simple life. The students are required to execute an undertaking to abide by the Code of Conduct prescribed by the Institute. A student is also required to give a bond of Rs. 25,000 to serve in a rural area. If such a job is offered by the Government of India, Government of Maharashtra or Kasturba Health Society, for a minimum period of 3 years. Students are also required to give a bond of Rs. 5,000 to be paid in the event of withdrawing from the institute after admission.

4. The rule relating to migration is as follows:

"No application for migration to other Medical College will be entertained from the students admitted to this Institute."

The 2nd and the 3rd Respondents in their affidavits filed in this petition have explained that they are against such migration because the capacity of the Institute to provide training and education has to be utilised to a maximum extent. They have pointed out that they conduct a competitive examination to select students for admission to the M.B.B.S. Course with an idea that the students who are admitted will complete the course in the same institute. They have tried to ensure that a seat does not fall vacant in the middle of course. They have also set out that this is necessary so that other candidates who would have been otherwise eligible and entitled to admission on the basis of their merit, are not deprived of their legitimate claim only because a particular candidate occupies the seat only for a year with a view to migrate to another institute. The petitioner was aware of this rule which is prominently set out in the prospectus when they took admission for the First M.B.B.S. Course of the 3rd Respondent Institute. She has challenged this rule as violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India.

5. In my view, there is no substance in this challenge. In the case of (S. Azeez Basha and another v. The Union of India)1, reported in A.I.R. 1968 S.C. 662 the Supreme Court was required to consider the con

























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
whatsapp-icon Back to top