Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(AURANGABAD BENCH)
A.P. Shah B.H. Marlapalle, JJ.
Dr. Ganpat Mashnajirao Wadekar ..... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra others......Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 1152 of 1997, decided on 7-5-1997.
Advocates appeared :
Mrs. Smita Deshpande, for the petitioner.
S.K. Kadam, Govt. Pleader, for respondent- State.
The bar of rule 6 must therefore operate against the petitioner and his claim for admission to MS (General Surgery) course for the January 1997 batch cannot be entertained at the this belated stage. The petitioner cannot be allowed to move from one course to another at his free will, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The petition is, therefore, dismissed, and the Rule is discharged.
Article 226-Admission to petitioner against reserve seat-Choice of the petitioner to get admission to M.S.-Rules for admission to Post Graduate Course, 1991-Rule 6 requires 3 months notice by petitioner student not complied-Rules puts a bar on charge of registration from one subject to another-Not made out any case to show rules 6 as directory.- The petitioner was given admission to MS (ENT) against reserved seat as there was no reserved seat for MS (General Surgery) which was his choice. In the subsequent academic year he sought admission to MS (General Surgery) against reserved seat which was available then. Notice of 3 months as required under Rule 6 was not issued by the petitioner. Held, that the petitioner did not comply with Rule 6 which was mandatory and he could not be admitted to MS (General Surgery) specialty.
The change in admission from Diploma Course to Post Graduate Course in the same subject is governed by Rule 10 which is directory. Rule 6 provides that a candidate selected for registration will not in ordinary course be allowed to change his registration from one subject to another. A candidate who desires to .change registration from one subject to another will have to give three months notice before the commencement of the next term to enable notification of his vacancy for others and such application will automatically terminate the existing registration and it will be treated as a fresh application for registration in new subject. It is, therefore, clear that Rule 10 of the 1991 Rules for admission to Post Graduate Courses has no application to the facts of the present case and it is only Rule 6 has to be applied in the instant case. The said rule puts a bar on change of registration from one subject to another in ordinary course. If the provisions of Rule 6 are treated to be mandatory, clearly the petitioner has not made out any case to show that the provisions of the said Rule 6 are required to be viewed as directory in his case. Even otherwise, the petitioner has already been admitted to the MS (ENT) Course for the January, 1996 batch. He has completed almost one year of the said course and at the relevant time there was no seat reserve for sc qategory candidate for admission to MS (General Surgery) Course. In the background of these admitted facts, if the claim of the petitioner is accepted at this stage, the same would result in a mockery of admissions to Post Graduate Course in different disciplines and will defeat the very purpose of framing such Rules for admission. The bar of Rule 6 must therefore operate against the petitioner and his claim for admission to MS (General Surgery) Course for the January, 1997 batch cannot be entertained at this belated stage. The petitioner cannot be allowed to move from one course to another at his free will, in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
2.The factual matrix of the matter which is relevant to decide the claim of the petitioner is as under :
The petitioner belongs to S.C. Category and he sought admission to the M.B.B.S. Course from the said category. He passed his M.B.B.S. Examination in the first attempt and Secured 255 marks out of 400 in the subject of Surgery in the year 1994. He completed one year internship from 23-2-1995 to 22-2-1996 and became eligible for from 23-2-1995 to 22-2-1996 and became eligible for admission to Post Graduation Course from January-1996 Batch onwards. The petitioner also possessed the experience of house job in surgery.
3.The respondents issued an advertisement on 6th April, 1996 for admission to Post Graduation Courses (Degree and Diploma) for the January-1996 Batch and the said admissions were against the seats available at the Government Medical College, Aurangabad as well as S.R.T.R. Medical College at Ambajogai. The petitioner submitted his application for P.G. with first preference to M.S. (General Surgery) as contended by the petitioner. In pursuance of a decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1530 of 1996, a revised roster came to be prepared for January 1996 batch after pooling all the available registrations at Government Medical College at Aurangabad and S.R.T.R. Medical College at Ambajogai together. With this advertisement, the previous advertisements issued in April 1996 was superseded and at the S.R.T.R. Medical College Ambajogai, one seat for S.C. Category was reserved for Post Graduate Courses in E.N.T. whereas for M.S. (General Surgery) there was no reservation at all and the lone seat was meant for an open category candidate. However, before the admissions were finalised against the advertisement dated 13-6-1996, the respondents issued fresh advertisement and it was stated that 25 per cent seats allotted to D.H.S. for in-service candidates were not to be calculated from the number of seats allotted to junior residents and that had led to increase in the number of Post Graduate registration. Therefore, a revised roster was prepared for January 1996 batch after pooling the previous and newly available P.G. Registrations of the Government Medical College, Aurangabad and S.R.T.R. Medical College, Ambajogai. It is thus clear that for the January-1996 batch the advertisement issued in the month of July-1996 was the final advertisement in supersession of the earlier two advertisements. As per this advertisement in all 42 seats were reserved for degree course at the Government Medical College at Aurangabad as well as S.R.T.R. Medical College at Aurangabad as well as S.R.T.R. Medical College, Ambajogai and 20 seats were reserved for diploma courses. For the admission to Post Graduation in M.S. Surgery at S.R.T.R. Medical College at Ambajogai there were in all two seats and one seat was for open category candidate and the other seat was for O.B.C. Category candidate, whereas for the P.G. (E.N.T.) Course there was only one seat at S.R.T.R. Medical College at Ambajogai and that lone seat was reserved for an S.C. Category candidate. Admittedly, the petitioner's application was considered by the respondents for admission to M.S. (E.N.T.) at S.R.T.R. Medical College at Ambajogai against the lone seat for S.C. Category candidate and he was granted admission to the said Course which he joined on 27th September, 1996.
4.Subsequently, on 16-11-1996, the respondent No. 3 published another advertisement for Post Graduate Admission against the July-1996 batch and 21 seats were reserved for degree courses whereas 9 seats were reserved for Diploma Courses. As far as Post Graduate (Surgery) Course was concerned, the lone seat allotted to S.R.T.R. Medical College, Ambjogai was meant for an open category candidate and there was no reservation. On 1-3-1997, the respondent No. 3 published an adve
SupremeToday
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
