Back
2014 Supreme(HP) 1725
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Tarlok Singh Chauhan, JJ.
Dr. Disha Sharma - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others – Respondents
CWP No.5419 of 2014 alongwith CWP No.4872 of 2014
Decided On : 04-11-2014
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Ashwani Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Mr.Romesh Verma and Mr. V.S.Chauhan, Additional Advocate Generals, Mr.J.K.Verma, Deputy Advocate General, Ms.Anjali Soni Verma, Advocate
Headnote:
Admissions - PG Medical Courses - MD/MS - [PSM, Pathology] - [SCHEDULE FOR ADMISSION POST GRADUATE COURSES [BROAD SPECIALITY] STATE QUOTA ALL INDIA QUOTA 1st round of Counselling To be over by 30th March Between 4th April and 16th April Last date for joining the allotted College and course 7th April 26th April 2nd round of Counselling for allotment of seats from waiting list 27th April to 3rd May 9th May to 13th May Last date for joining for candidates Allotted seats in 3rd round of Counselling 10th May 24th May 3rd round of counselling (Round for filling up seats reverted from AIQ/ other vacant State Quota Seats) 20th June to 25th June 25th May to 9th June Last date for joining for candidates Allotted seats in 3rd round of Counselling 30th June 19th June Commencement of academic Session 30th June 30th June Last date up to which students can be admitted against vacancies arising due to any reason from the waiting list 10th July Not applicable. The Medical Council of India will notify the aforesaid schedule. List the matters in the month of April, 2014. This order has been passed in modification of order dated 28th February, 2014.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner(s) approached the Court alleging that the respondents concealed two PG seats in Preventive and Social Medicine (PSM) and Pathology during the open counselling for filling up PG seats. The seats were later offered to lower-ranked candidates, contrary to the petitioner(s) who had a preferential right based on their higher merit.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the admissions were made by offering the seats only to waiting list candidates, in violation of the prescribed procedure and schedule for admissions to PG courses. The Court also noted the failure of the respondents to ensure fair and transparent admissions based on merit, as required by law.
Issues: The main issue was whether the vacant PG seats were required to be filled purely on merit from candidates desiring a change of course/specialty or only out of the waiting list.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that admissions must be made in a fair and transparent manner, strictly adhering to the prescribed procedure and schedule. It emphasized that admissions should be based on merit alone and that the rule of merit should not be compromised.
Final Decision: The Court directed the respondents to hold an inquiry and fix responsibility against the erring officials. It also issued directions for future admissions to be made strictly in accordance with the prospectus and the schedule prescribed by the Supreme Court, ensuring fair and transparent admissions based on merit.
JUDGMENT :
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
Since common question of law and facts arise for determination, therefore, both these petitions are taken up together for decision.
2. The petitioner(s) by way of these writ petitions have approached this Court making grievance therein that the respondents had not disclosed two seats of PSM (Preventive and Social Medicine) and Pathology in the open counselling held on 08.07.2014 for GDO in service candidates and had further illegally ted these seats to respondents No. 6 and 7, who were lower in merit to the petitioner(s).
3. The respondents in February, 2014, issued prospectus for the year 2014 for filling-up PG seats in IGMC, Shimla and DRPGMC, Tanda from amongst the candidates from HPHS ( in service General Duty Medical Officers) and HPHS Contract Service Medical Officer Group and Direct Group. The seats for Post Graduate (MD and MS) Degree Course have been categorized under Group-A (All India Quota Seats), Group-B (State Quota Seats). Under Group-B, the seats are further sub-classified as HPHS (in service General Duty Medical Officers) and HPHS Contract Service Medical Officer Group under HPHS (in service GDO). The petitioner (s) and the private respondents applied for PG seats under HPHS (in service General Duty Medical Officers) after qualifying All India NEET PG Competitive Entrance Examination. The petitioner(s) were ranked 63 and 79 respectively while the private respondents were ranked 91 and 93 respectively in the merit list.
4. The grievance of the petitioner (s) is that when they were called for second counselling on 08.07.2014 for filling-up the vacant PG seats, the respondents concealed and did not disclose two Post Graduate seats in Preventive and Social Medicine (in short hereinafter referred to 'PSM’) and Pathology and were informed that only seats in Microbiology and Biochemistry were vacant and were asked to give their options qua these two seats. Left with no other option, the petitioner(s) accepted these seats by depositing the fees. The petitioner(s) were shocked and surprised when they came to know that the official respondents had infact offered the aforesaid two Post Graduate seats in 'PSM’ and Pathology to the respondents No.6 and 7 on 10.07.2014 without offering these seats first to the petitioner(s), who had a preferential right qua the same on account of their being better placed in merit.
5. The officials respondents initially filed short reply and there appeared to be some contradictions in Paras 3 and 7 thereof and accordingly this Court vide order dated 22.09.2014 directed the official respondents to file supplementary affidavit. In compliance to the aforesaid orders, the respondents filed supplementary affidavit wherein they categorically stated that in the 3rd round of counselling held on 08.07.2014, the following PG (MD/MS) seats were offered to the petitioner(s):-
1 PG seat of MD Community Medicine (Preventive and Social Medicine),
1 PG seat of Microbiology and
1 PG seat of Bio-chemistry for GDO (General) group and category.
6. It is further alleged that contrary to the claim set up by the petitioner(s), none of them opted for PG seats in 'PSM’ and infact exercised their options and accepted the seats of Microbiology and Biochemistry, respectively. Insofar as the allegation of the petitioner(s) that two seats of 'PSM’ and Pathology had been filled-up on 10.07.2014 in a surreptitious manner by offering the same to respondents No.6 and 7 without first offering the same to the petitioner(s), who were higher in merit, the respondents have repelled this claim in the following manner:-
“10. That it is submitted that after completion of 3rd round of Counselling, while compilation/finalization of the record on 10.7.2014, it was found that two seats remained vacant (One seat of MD Community Medicine GDO General (regular) and one seat of MD Pathology GDO (contract).
It is
