Back
2020 Supreme(Gau) 648
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
N. Kotiswar Singh, Manish Choudhury, JJ.
State Of Assam - Appellant
Versus
Vicky Kumar Patel - Respondent
Review Petition No. 132 of 2019; Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4472 of 2018
Decided On : 15-12-2020
D. Saikia, Advocate, B. Gogoi, Advocate, M. Sarania, Advocate
The court held that the impugned Rule 4(2)(c) of the 2007 Rules requiring the candidates to possess minimum marks in the qualifying examination which is more than the minimum marks prescribed by the MCI to appear in NEET can negate the candidature of the candidate, who finds place in the merit list of NEET for admission, and therefore, Rule 4(2)(c) is directly in conflict with Section 10D of the 1956 Act and the 1997 Regulations.
Headnote:
Review petition filed by the petitioners seeking review of the order dated 16.08.2019 passed in the WP(C) No. 4472 of 2018 primarily on the ground that a very important document, namely, the "Information Bulletin" published by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) which also provides for eligibility criteria in more detail for the State Quota of medical/dental seats could not be produced at the time of hearing of the writ petition, and hence, was not considered by the Court, which could have made a difference on the ultimate outcome of the decision rendered by this Court. The court held that the contents of the "Information Bulletin" do not introduce any new fact, other than which were already available publicly. Further, the contents of the Information Bulletin could not have added anything new to the Rules framed by the State Government. The contents of the "Information Bulletin" was prepared by the CBSE and not the State government. It merely provided the information in more detail of what had been already mentioned in the Admission Notice that all other existing eligibility criteria for admission to Medical/Dental Colleges, shall be applicable as per Rules and Policies of the State/UT/Institution/University concerned and that concerned admitting authorities will invite applications for counselling and merit list shall be drawn based on All India Rank by the admitting authorities subject to theor applicable rules. The court held that the Information Bulletin does not contain any new and important matter or evidence and as such non consideration of the same cannot be said to be any error apparent on the face of the record and thus it cannot be said to have caused any grave miscarriage of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner appeared in the NEET, UG 2018 conducted by the CBSE, securing 421 marks out of 720 marks as a General Category candidate securing NEET All India Ranking 610902. In the list prepared for the State Quota of the State of Assam, he was placed at serial No. 332. His candidature was rejected at the counselling stage on the ground that he was not eligible as per the State Rules as the average marks secured by him in Physics, Chemistry and Biology was less than 60% for unreserved candidates as provided under Rule 4(2)(c) of the aforesaid State Rules.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the impugned Rule 4(2)(c) of the 2007 Rules requiring the candidates to possess minimum marks in the qualifying examination which is more than the minimum marks prescribed by the MCI to appear in NEET can negate the candidature of the candidate, who finds place in the merit list of NEET for admission, and therefore, Rule 4(2)(c) is directly in conflict with Section 10D of the 1956 Act and the 1997 Regulations.
Issues: Whether the State can prescribe higher qualifications for admission in the Medical Colleges, which has been clearly mentioned in the "Information Bulletin".
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the aforesaid Information Bulletin does not contain any new and important matter or evidence and as such non consideration of the same cannot be said to be any error apparent on the face of the record and thus it cannot be said to have caused any grave miscarriage of justice.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the review petition.
JUDGMENT
N. Kotiswar Singh, A.C.J. - Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. B. Gogoi, appearing for the Review Petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel for the Respondent/Writ Petitioner.
2. The present review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 16.08.2019 passed in the WP(C) No. 4472 of 2018 primarily on the ground that a very important document, namely, the "Information Bulletin" published by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) which also provides for eligibility criteria in more detail for the State Quota of medical/dental seats could not be produced at the time of hearing of the writ petition, and hence, was not considered by the Court, which could have made a difference on the ultimate outcome of the decision rendered by this Court.
3. To appreciate the contention of the Review Petitioners, the salient features of the judgement sought to be reviewed, in the backdrop of the facts and the legal submissions considered by the Court, may be highlighted.
4. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by the present respondent challenging Rule 4(2)(c) of the Medical Colleges & Dental Colleges of Assam (Regulation of Admission into 1st Year MBBS Course) Rules, 2017 ( for short, "State Rules") as notified on 01.07.2017 by the Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Assam.
5. Admission to Medical and Dental Colleges is based on a common entrance examination at all India level, known as National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) conducted of at the relevant time by the CBSE as provided under Section 10D of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Seats available in various Medical and Dental Colleges are categorised under Central Quota and State
6. The State Quota seats is defined in Rule 2(xxvi) of the State Rules, to mean the seats available for admission into 1st year MBBS and BDS Courses in the Medical Colleges and Dental Colleges of Assam as per the Medical Council of India (for short, "MCI") and Dental Council of India (for short, "DCI") norms, excluding seats allotted under 15% All India Quota, Central Pool and NE State Quota.
7. Rule 4 provides for the mode of selection of State Quota candidates. It reads as follows:
"4. Mode of Selection of State Quota Candidates.-
(1) The candidates who qualify in the NEET as per NEET Rules for admission into 1st year MBBS/BDS Course shall have to apply to the DME in a Declaration Form as per the Educational Notice published by the DME immediately after the declaration of NEET result. The Declaration Form shall be available in the office website (www.dmeassam.gov.in).
(2) Eligibility of the candidates to be called for counselling.-
(a) The candidate must pass the qualifying examination.
(b) The candidate must pass all the four subjects i.e. Physics, Chemistry, Biology/Biotechnology (which shall include practical tests in these subjects) and English of the qualifying examination in the same sitting and without grace marks.
(c) The candidate must obtain a minimum of 60% marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology/Biotechnology at the qualifying examination in case of candidates belonging to General/Unreserved category. In respect of candidates belonging to SC/ST(P)/ST(H)/OBC/MOBC category the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry and Biology/Biotechnology taken together in the qualifying examination shall be 50%."
8. Vis-A-Vis the requirement of aforesaid Rule 4(2)(c), the writ petitioner had passed Class XII examination in Science Stream from the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council securing 55, 62, & 54 marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, respectively, in one attempt, securing an average of 57% marks in those subjects which fell short of the requirement under Rule 4(2)(c), though the petitioner fulfilled the eligibility criteria for appearing in the NEET, of which there is no dispute.
9. The petitioner appeared in the NEET, UG 2018 conducted by the CBSE, securing 421 marks out of 720 marks as a General Category
