ORAL JUDGMENT:---Rule returnable forthwith. Respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 waive service through Counsel. Inverveners waive service through Mr. Vashi. By consent, rule called out for immediate hearing and heard.

2.The short point which arises for determination in this writ petition is; "If for some fortuitous reason the quota of 25% of the seats which ought to be reserved for the candidates passing the All India Entrance Examination is unfilled, is the State entitled to reserve any of those seats, by applying its reservation policy thereto?"

3.The Counsel are agreed that, as a result of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of (Pradeep Jain v. Union of India)1, A.I.R. 1984 S.C. 1420, the mode of selection of candidates for the Post Graduate Medical Courses, is as under :---

A. 25% of the total number of available seats are carved out into a separate category and have to be filled up only by admitting students who have passed the All India Entrance Examination (All India Quota).

B. Of the balance 75% of the seats remaining, 15% have to be reserved for in-service candidates (In-service quota).

C. Certain percentage, not exceedings 50% of the balance, have to be reserved for different categories of students like Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, Nomadic Tribes and other backward classes.

4.Upto and including the academic year 1999-2000, the State of Maharashtra did not insist that the students admitted in the All India quota had to undergo one year's rural service as a pre-requisite for admission to Post Graduate Students in Medicine. Consequently, during the year 1999-2000 the seats were filled up from the All India quota only on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in the All India Entrance Examination. We are informed by the learned Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra that though in the 1996 Rules there was a provision that all students, irrespective of whether they applied for State Quota or All India Quota, had to fulfil the pre-requisite of one year's rural service, for some reason this was not implemented upto and including the year 1999-2000, is so far as All India Quota was concerned. From the year 2000 onwards the State Government has implemented this Rule vis-a-vis the All India Quota. We are also informed that the implementation of this Rule vis-a-vis the All India Quota was challenged before this Court and the challenge failed and though the matter was carried to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court was not inclined to interfere. Consequently, the State of Maharashtra implemented the Rule with regard to the pre-requisite of one year's rural service to all the candidates applying both in the State as well as the All India Quota. For the current year 2000-2001, however, an anomalous position has developed in view of the State's insistence that all the candidates applying for Post Graduate Medical Course, must have completed one year's rural service. The State finds itself in a situation where not a single candidate who qualifies under this rule was available for filling up the All India Quota. Hence, about 140 and odd seats would go unfilled. Obviously, this would mean wastage of State's resources and detriment to national interest. The State therefore has decided that these seats would also to be filled in by local candidates by applying to them the same yardstick of merits as applied to other candidates selected in the State quota.

5.The Petitioners contend that the 140 and odd seats, which have fallen vacant for the current year, are not part of the State quota and, therefore, the State's reservation policy cannot be made applicable to the said seats and that those seats must be filled only in accordance with the merits by not applying the reservation policy.

6.We have been taken through the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (Dr. Jeevak Almast v. Union of India and others)2, A.I.R. 1988 S.C. 1812. Mr. Thorat, the learned Counsel for the petitioners relies upon this judgment and conte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document