2009 Supreme(Bom) 513
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SWATANTER KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
Gorakhnath Balu Shinde
Versus
State of Maharashtra through the Department of Medical Education & Drugs & Another
WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 640 OF 2009
Decided on : 16-04-2009
For the Petitioner:V.M. Thorat, Advocate. For the Respondents:
M.D. Naik, Assistant Government Pleader.
The judgment establishes the binding nature of information brochure terms and conditions in the admission process, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to the prescribed methodology for admission.
Headnote:
Non-Creamy Layer Certificate - Admission to Post Graduate Dental Course - Clauses 5 and 6 of the information brochure - Government resolution No HINDI - Binding nature of brochure terms and conditions
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner, belonging to Hindu Dhangar caste, was admitted to a B.D.S. course and completed all eligibility criteria for the entrance examination to a Post Graduate Dental course. Due to the expiration of his Non-Creamy Layer certificate, he was unable to fill the preference form and attend counseling, leading to the filing of the Writ Petition.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the terms and conditions of the information brochure were unambiguous and binding on all parties involved in the admission process. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the brochure's requirements and upheld the decision to dismiss the Writ Petition.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the validity of the Non-Creamy Layer certificate and its impact on the Petitioner's admission process for the Post Graduate Dental course.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the binding nature of the information brochure's terms and conditions, highlighting the importance of strict adherence to the prescribed methodology for admission.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed, with the parties left to bear their own costs. The Court also stated that if any seat remained vacant in the category claimed by the Petitioner, the Government may consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with the law and purely on merit.
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.
The Petitioner, who belongs to Hindu Dhangar caste which is recognized as NT-2 category, was admitted to B. D. S. course at M.A. Rangoonwala Dental College, Pune in the said category in the year 2003. Thereafter, the Petitioner passed his final year B.D. S. examination in the year 2007 and in accordance with the Rules, also completed his one year compulsory internship. The Petitioner thus satisfied all the eligibility criteria prescribed for taking the entrance examination CET for admission to Post Graduate Dental course. This examination was held on 25th January 2009, the Petitioner scored 79 marks out of 100 marks and was declared successful and placed at Sr.No. 39 in the State merit list and at Sr. No. 1 in NT-2 category. Respondent No. 2 had published the information brochure for the purpose of admission to Dental Post Graduate course. As per the terms and conditions of the brochure, the preference form was to be filled on 24th March 2009. It is the case of the Petitioner that his brother-in-law was hospitalized and unfortunately he died on 27th March 2009. The candidates claiming the benefit of NT-1, NT-2, NT-3 and OBC were required to produce the Non-creamy layer certificate valid upto 31st March 2009 on or before 24th March 2009, the date for filling up of the preference form. The Petitioner had earlier obtained the Non-creamy layer certificate which was valid upto 31st March 2003. The Respondent No.2 informed the Petitioner that the same would not be taken into consideration by the Respondents as the said certificate was required to be valid upto 31st March 2009. Thereafter, the Petitioner, through his brother, made an application and was issued the certificate by the Sub-Divisional Officer Madha, Kurduwadi, Solapur on 26th March 2009. In view of these facts, the Petitioner could not fill up the preference form and attend counselling on 24th March 2009. However, subsequently he approached Respondent No.2 for submission of the said certificate and consequential counselling and allotment of seat to the Petitioner. This request was not accepted by the Respondents thus resulting in filing of the present Writ Petition.
2. We had with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents taken up the matter for final disposal at the admission stage itself. The Respondents did not file any counter but argued the matter on merits.
3. The Government of Maharashtra, Department of Medical Education and Drugs Department had published the information brouchre and application form for admission to the Dental Post Graduate courses (MDS) which was available to all concerned much prior to the filling up of the preference form and counselling. In this brochure, it was stated that the preference for filling up the preference form and counselling would be in the third week of March 2009 and select list would be published thereafter. Whatever subsequent matter was to be notified, it was stated that the same would be duly notified. Clause 5 of Annexure “C”, which deals with Constitutional reservation for allocation of seats, provides that the candidate should have claimed the Constitutional reservation in the original application form, the candidate claiming such reservation submitting the original caste validity certificate at the time of counselling for filling preference form was a must failing which the category claimed would not be granted. Clauses 5 and 6 read as under:-
“5. The candidate should have claimed the constitutional reservation in the original application form. The candidate claiming constitutional reservation must submit original caste validity certificate at the time of counseling for filling preference form, failing which the category claim will not be granted.
6. NONCREAMY LAYER
A candidate belonging to `Creamy Layer' amongst the categories (C) to (G) must note that the provision of reservation is NOT