1993 Supreme(Bom) 524

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(NAGPUR BENCH)
H.W. Dhabe and B.U. Wahane, JJ.
Dr. Anil s/o. Keshaorao More.... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 378 of 1993, decided on 12/16-8-1993.
Advocates appeared :
S.G. Aney and Z.A. Haq, for the petitioner.
B.T. Patil, G.P., for the respondents 1 to 3.
Smt. Shinde, for the respondent No. 6.

Headnote:Article 226-Rules for Admission for Post-Graduate Course, G.R., dated 24.12.1991, Rules 5 and 6-Nagpur University Ordinance Order 57, Clause 16-Change of subject-Meaning of.

       In construing the word Subject in Role 6 of the Roles for admission, it is necessary to bear in mind that the rules for admission are common to both i.e., the Post-Graduate Diploma and Degree Course. Further, Rule 5 of the Rules for admission refers to common subjects for Post-Graduate studies, whether for Diploma or Degree Course. Similarly, in the University Ordinances 56 and 57, the subjects for Post Graduate studies are the same although the courses of study may be different. It is, therefore, clear that the word Subject used in Role 6 of the Admission Rules in not used with reference to the course of study therein as such. In fact Role 16 of University Ordinance No. 57 was there when the rules for admission were framed by the Slate Government. Still roles for admission framed by the Slate Government have not dealt with the question of change of registration from Post-Graduate Diploma to Degree Course whether in the same or the different subject which would show that such change of registration is not intended to be covered by Rule 6 of the Rules for admission. This is the stand taken by the State Government also in its written submissions.

       Although, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has sought to draw assistance from Clause 16 of the University Ordinance about concurrent registration in Diploma and Degree Course in the same or different subject in interpreting Rule 6 of the Rules for admission framed by the State Government, it is difficult to see how the said clause can help him in interpreting the said Rule 6. It is clear from reading Clause 16 of the University Ordinance No. 57 that when it prohibits concurrent registration in the same subject in Post-Graduate Diploma and Degree Course, it contemplates that irrespective of the nature of courses of study in the said course, the subject is common in both the courses i.e., Diploma and Degree. The courses for study, therefore, do not make the same subject different in Diploma or Degree Course for the purpose of prohibiting concurrent registration.

       There is thus, no reason why the word-subject used in Rule 6 of the Rules for admission for the purpose of change of registration from one subject to another should be interpreted in different manner viz., that the same subject should be treated as a different subject for the Diploma Course and Degree Course for the purpose of change of registration. It is pertinent to see that in Rule 6 of the Rules for admission since the emphasis is upon the change of registration in the subject as such, the said rule is not as comprehensive as Clause 16 of the University Ordinance No. 57 which is explicit in not allowing concurrent requirements for Diploma Courses or Degree Courses in the same or different subjects. It cannot, therefore, be held in view of the language used in Rule 6 of the Rules for admission that it covers a case of change of registration in the same subject from Diploma to Degree Course.

       Rule 6 of the Rules for admission is not applicable for change of registration from Diploma to Degree Course in the same subject, it is necessary to consider only the question whether Clause 16 of the University Ordinance No. 57 would prohibit the petitioner from applying for admission to the Degree Course.

       Held; perusal of Clause 16 of the University Ordinance No. 57 would show that although it does not permit concurrent registration it is open to the candidate to forgo his registration in the subject in which he is registered for either Post-Graduate Diploma or Degree Course, and claim registration in the same subject for Degree Course or registration in any other subject either for the Diploma or Degree Course as the case may be. There is however, no mode like Rule 6 of the Rules for admission provided in Clause 16 of the University Ordinance No. 57 for forging registration in the subject, in which the candidate is registered before seeking registration in the same or in any other subject for the Diploma or Degree Course, as the case may be. The student can, therefore, forgo his registration at the time, when he is seeking new registration. It is brought to the Courts notice that in the instant case, the respondent No.5 had in the Application from for admission to the Post Graduate Degree Course in pediatrics mentioned that he was registered for D.C.H. already and the Competent Authority was aware of the above fact and had in fact, filled in the seat of the respondent No.5 in D.C.H. Course. There is thus, no question of any concurrent registration in the above facts and circumstances of the instant case, because the registration of the respondent No.5 in D.C.H. Course stands cancelled, when she was granted registration in Degree Course, Rule] 6 of the University Ordinance No. 57 is thus not attracted in the instant case.