SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 5277

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
Dr. (Maj) Shivani Dhaka (Retd.) - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. - Respondents
LPA 708 of 2023 and CM APPL.54221 of 2023, CM APPL.54222 of 2023
Decided On : 17-10-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Amit Dhaka, Ms. Astha Gumber and Mr. Prateek Chauhan, Advocates along with Appellant in person.
Mr. Anshuman Singh, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Aakash Meena, GP and Mr. Aiyush Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the Respondent.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity to uphold the integrity and efficiency of the educational admission system, precluding measures that would induce extensive delays and potentially disrupt the academic progression of numerous candidates already poised to commence their studies.

Headnote:

AFMS - Admission Process - Information Bulletin, Armed Forces Medical Services Act - The court addressed the dispute over the allocation of additional seats during the admission process for postgraduate courses at AFMS institutions. The judgment discussed the methodology employed in the allotment of specific seats, the priority categories, and the fairness of the allocation process. Key legal provisions such as the Information Bulletin and the principles of timely conclusion of admissions were considered in reaching the decision.

Fact of the Case:

The Appellant contested the methodology employed in the allotment of specific seats during the admission process for postgraduate courses at AFMS institutions. The dispute centered on the decision to directly allocate ten additional DNB seats at Base Hospital, New Delhi, during the counselling for 'Priority-V' category candidates. The Appellant questioned the transparency and equity of the allocation process.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that mandating allocation of the additional seats specifically for Priority-IV candidates to accommodate the Appellant would necessitate an entire repetition of the counselling process, disrupting the academic progression of numerous candidates already poised to commence their studies. The court declined to entertain the appeal and clarified that the Appellant's existing postgraduate qualifications will not come in the way of her applying for admission to AFMS institutions under the same category next year.

Issues: The issues revolved around the fairness of the allocation process, the priority categories, and the propriety of the allocation process concerning the additional seats. The court also addressed the completion of the admission process within a definitive timeframe.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the principles of timely conclusion of admissions and the necessity to uphold the integrity and efficiency of the educational admission system. The court declined to entertain the appeal, considering the advanced stages of the admission process and the potential disruption that mandating allocation of the additional seats for the Appellant would cause.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and clarified that the Appellant's existing postgraduate qualifications will not hinder her from applying for admission to AFMS institutions under the same category next year.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral) - This letters patent appeal (LPA) arises out of the judgment dated 11th October, 2023, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in W.P. (C) 13322/2023 [hereinafter "impugned judgment"]. In the writ petition, the Appellant contested the methodology employed in the allotment of specific seats during the admission process for postgraduate courses at Armed Forces Medical Services (AFMS) institutions. The crux of the dispute centred on the decision by Respondent No. 2-Director General, Armed Forces Medical Service ["DGAFMS"]-to directly allocate ten additional DNB seats at Base Hospital, New Delhi, during the counselling for "Priority-V" category candidates. These seats, it is crucial to note, were not made available in the preceding counselling rounds for candidates in the higher "Priority" categories, namely Priority-I through IV. The learned Single Judge, however, recognized that reintroducing said seats to candidates from earlier stages would potentially trigger a perpetual cycle of counselling, an outcome deemed impractical. Acknowledging this, the learned Single Judge opted not to intervene in the counselling procedure. The Appellant's challenge, therefore, is narrowly tailored to address the propriety of the allocation process concerning these additional seats, questioning both transparency and equity of the said process.

FACTS AND PETITIONER'S CONTENTIONS

2. The brief facts of the case as laid out in the petition and submissions advanced by learned counsel for Appellant, are as under:

2.1. The Appellant, Dr. (Maj.) Shivani Dhaka (Retd.), is an ex-servicewoman of Short Service Commission (SSC) of AFMS. The Appellant, desirous of pursuing higher education at AFMS Institutions, appeared for NEET-PG exam in March 2023, where she secured 440 marks and an All India Rank of 35917.

2.2. On 26th July, 2023, DGAFMS invited applications for Post Graduate courses from eligible candidates for the session 2023-2026. As per the scheme of counselling, the order of preference of candidates for allotment of seats is specified as under:

(a) Priority-I: Eligible serving officers of the AFMS.

(b) Priority-II: Foreign students sponsored by Government.

(c) Priority-III: Medical officers sponsored by Para Military Forces/other Government of India organizations.

(d) Priority-IV: Ex-SSC AFMS officers released from service after completion of contractual service, within three years after the release from service i.e., the date of release should not be before 01st May 2020 and after the last date of joining into the courses as notified by MCC.

(e) Priority-V: Civilian doctors willing to serve in AFMS for five years after completion of the course subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria. The candidate will have to execute a bond agreement to pay an amount as sanctioned by the Government of India at the time of admission, in case unwilling to join AFMS, when offered commission on completion of the course.

2.3. The Appellant desirous of attaining postgraduate medical qualification registered on MCC/DGHS (MoHFW) website as a "Priority-IV" candidate. The admission process for postgraduate courses is governed by the terms and conditions laid down in the Information Bulletin, for Post Graduate Courses in AFMS through NEET-PG 2023 [hereinafter "the Information Bulletin"]. On 10th August, 2023, a seat matrix for AFMS PG counselling 2023 was published on the website of AFMS which reflected a total of 145 seats. However, no seats of Base Hospital, New Delhi-which were sought by the Appellant, were shown in the seat matrix:

2.4. Subsequently, another notification dated 11th August, 2023 was issued amending the seat matrix as follows:

2.5. As per the merit list for Priority-IV candidates provisionally eligible for counselling published on 11th August, 2023; Appellant was ranked 21 out of a total of 81 candidates in Priority-IV category. However, no seats of Base Hospital, New Delhi were shown in the seat matrix published on 11

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top