JUDGMENT - N.P. CHAPALGAONKER, J.:---Heard Shri A.Y. Pandule, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri K.B. Chaudhari, learned A.G.P. for respondents Nos. 1 to 4.

2.The petitioner is a permanent resident of District Beed in the State of Maharashtra. His father is working as a Conductor in the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and is posted in Ahmednagar district. The petitioner was born on 27-3-1980 at Kada in Beed district. After taking primary education at Kada, he was admitted to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya at Gadhi, Tq. Georai in Beed district. He studied there for 6th, 7th and 8th standards and thereafter, under a scheme for transfer of students of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas from one State to another State, presumably for promoting the national integration, petitioner was transferred to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Multan in Madhya Pradesh. There he took education for 9th and 10th standards and passed his 10th standard examination from Multan school in the year 1994-95. Thereafter, petitioner again returned back to the State of Maharashtra and continued his education and passed his 12th standard examination from the Secondary and Higher Secondary Board, Aurangabad. Petitioner now seeks admission to B.A.M.S. course conducted in the respondent No. 3 college.

3.The Government of Maharashtra has framed rules for selection to the B.A.M.S., B.H.M.S. and B.U.M.S. courses for the year 1998-99. Rule 3(b) of the eligibility part of these rules reads as under :

"The applicant must have passed the S.C.C. or equivalent examination from Maharashtra."

The children of the employees of Central Government and the State Government and Government Undertakings have been excluded from operation of these rules under certain circumstances. The petitioner does not come under the exempted categories. However, it is the contention of the petitioner that he was transferred to Multan and was forced to have the S.S.C. examination outside the State of Maharashtra and, therefore, he cannot be excluded from being considered for further education in the State of Maharashtra merely on the ground that he has passed his S.S.C. examination from the educational institution outside the State of Maharashtra.

4.The learned Counsel for the petitioner prays that Rule 3(b) be struck down as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India being unreasonable and discriminatory. Apart from the hardship which the petitioner is likely to face, we do not see any reason to accept the prayer of the petitioner to struck down this rule. It is the well known fact that education to the professional courses like M.B.B.S., B.A.M.S., Engineering and other technical courses are most sought for avenues of education and it is perfectly justified for the State Government to prescribe certain conditions such as passing of the examinations in the State of Maharashtra, to give preference to the students of this State since the State money is expended in establishing such professional educational institutions. We do not see anything wrong in prescribing this to be a condition for admission to the courses. Therefore, we are not inclined to consider Prayer (B) in the petition wherein the rule has been assailed.

5.A rule will have to be read reasonably and implemented reasonably. The purpose of the rule is to reserve some seats for professional courses in Maharashtra to the students from the State of Maharashtra and we do not find any fault with this purpose. However, it is unfortunate that while mentioning the excluded categories, due care has not been taken by the authorities. If somebody is forced to go outside Maharashtra, then his children need not be punished by excluding them from consideration for admission to the educational institutions in Maharashtra. This may be a case in respect of the Government servant who is forced to go outside Maharashtra. It may also be a case in respect of a person domiciled in the State of Maharashtra, born in Maharashtra and whose family r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document