M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. In this writ application the petitioner seeks mandamus directing the respondents to allow her to take admission in the first year of M.B.B.S. Course in the Rajendra Institute of Medical Science. Ranchi for the Sessions 2004-05.

2. Petitioners case is that her father is in the police service in the Unified State of Bihar and presently posted as Inspector of Police at Patna. Petitioner appeared in the Entrance Examination and qualified for the preliminary test and also in the main examination and her position in the merit list is 43. Accordingly, call letter was issued for counseling. Petitioner appeared before the Counseling Board. But her admission was refused on the ground of non-resident of State of Jharkhand. It is contended by the petitioner that candidates upto 46 rank in the merit list got admission in Rajendra Institute of Medical Science, Ranch, and so she is also entitled to admission in the said Institution.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4, namely, Controller of Examination, Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board and the Counselling Board Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board wherein it is stated that in the prospectus itself it was clarified that only those applicant can get admission who is native/permanent resident of Jharkhand State of or local resident of Jharkhand in terms of Circular No. 2691 dated 29.4.2002 or whose parent is an employee of United Nations Organisation and he/she is at present posted in Jharkhand, it is contended by the respondents that petitioner does not fulfill either of the criteria as native/permanent/local resident of Jharkhand State and admittedly, petitioner does not fulfill the criteria fixed in the Rules and therefore respondents have rightly denied admission of the petitioner.

4. I have heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Saurav Arun, learned counsel for the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that admittedly petitioners father is in police service in the Unified State of Bihar and is presently posted at Patna since there has not be division of cadre of Inspector of Police till date and. therefore, the service of petitioners father may be allotted to any of the two States. According to the learned counsel till the cadre division is finalized, service of the petitioners father is for both the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand. Petitioner therefore fulfilled the criteria fixed in the Rules.

6. Mr. Saurav Arun learned advocate, on the other hand, submitted that in anticipation that in final cadre division petitioners father may be allotted Jharkhand Cadre, it cannot be held that petitioner fulfilled the criteria fixed in the Rules framed by the respondents.

7. It has not been disputed that petitioners father is in the police service in the unified State of Bihar and presently he is posted as Inspector of Police at Patna. It is also not in dispute that there has not been cadre division of Inspector of Police till date between the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand and therefore service of petitioners father may be allotted to any of the two States.

8. Both the parties have annexed copy of extract of prospectus of Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination. 2004 (in short JCECE) as annexure-6/Annexure-A. In column (Kha) of the said prospectus the criteria for being local resident has been fixed. According to this circular/guideline a person will be deemed to be local resident if any of his/her parent is in the Government service of the Slate of Jharkhand or retired from the service of the Government of Jharkhand. Petitioner has annexed a copy of the prospectus of Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination, 2004 in which criteria has been fixed that the candidates must be the permanent resident of the State of Bihar or parents of the candidates or one of them is an employee of the Government of Bihar or any candida