Admission to professional courses must be based on merit, and fairness is essential in the admission process. Monetary compensation can be awarded as a means of restitution for legal injury caused.

The petitioner, a qualified Medical Graduate, had sought admission to the Post-Grade M.D. Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the Medical Colleges of the State of Assam for the Session 1998-99. According to the writ petitioner, though she was better placed in merit than the respondent No. 4, the authorities had granted admission to the respondent No. 4 bypassing the superior claim of the writ petitioner. Hence, the present writ application has been filed for appropriate interference and for further directions from this Court.

2. The facts, in brief, may be recited at the outset.

Admission to the different Post Graduate courses in the Medical Colleges of the State are regulated by the provision of Assam Medical College (Regulation of Admission to the Post Graduate Course) Rules 2000. Under the aforesaid rules, a competitive examination, called the Entrance Examination, is to be held on the basis of which candidates are placed in order of merit. Thereafter, interview/counselling sessions are required to be held in which seats are offered in different streams depending on the total number of seats available against a particular stream and the relative merit of the candidates concerned. In the instant case, for the academic session 1998-99, the Entrance 'examination’ was held on 28.7,2000, and in the result 'declared in the month of September, 2000, the petitioner, who had opted to pursue the MD course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, obtained 129 out of 200 marks. The first counselling/interview was held on 24.11.2000 and the petitioner was offered a seat to pursue the Diploma Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Accordingly, she took admission in the said course on 15.2.2001. A second counselling followed by a third was held on 16.6.2001 and 27.11.2001 and in the said counselling, though the petitioner persisted with her initial claim for a seat in the MD course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, she was not successful, as according to the respondent authorities, no seat was available in the said course against which the petitioner could be accommodated. However, on 18.12.2001, the respondent No. 4 was offered a seat in the MD course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the Silchar Medical College. As the respondent No. 4 was placed lower in merit than the writ petitioner having secured 118 out of 200 marks in the entrance examination, the petitioner has instituted the present writ proceeding for cancellation of the admission of the respondent No. 4 and for a further direction to the authorities to give admission to the petitioner against the aforesaid seat. It may be noticed herein that admission to the respondent No. 4 was offered by order dated 18.12.2001 passed by the Principal-cum-Chief Superintendent Silchar Medical College and Hospital. In the aforesaid order dated 18.12.2001, it has been recited that admission to respondent No. 4 has been granted pursuant to the order dated 29.10.2001 of the Director of Medical Education. The order dated 20.10.2001 of the Director of Medical Education referred to in the order dated 18.12.2001 is on record and the same would go to show that the respondent No. 4 was allowed to take admission against a vacant seat in the MD course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the Silchar Medical College, Silchar pursuant to the order dated 19.9.2001 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 4505/2001.

3. The claims made by the writ petitioner have been resisted by the official respondents as well as the private respondent No. 4 by filing separate counter affidavits.

The official respondents do not dispute that the respondent No. 4 was lower in merit than the writ petitioner in the result of the entrance examination. What is contended is that admission to the respondent No. 4 has been made pursuant to the directions of this Court dated 19.9.2001 in W.P.(C) No. 4505/2001. It is further contended that the seat in question was offered to the respondent No. 4, as at the relevant point of time, all the candid