Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. MANIKUMAR, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, JJ.
Aparna Rajendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary, Selection Committee, Admission to MBBS/BDS Courses – Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 1512 of 2018 and C.M.P. Nos. 12110, 12111 of 2018
Decided On : 31-07-2018
NATIVITY - ADMISSION TO MBBS/BDS COURSE - [Clause 3(k), Clause 3(l)] - The court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the order directing automatic cancellation of the allotment granted to the petitioner to pursue MBBS Course in Government Stanley Medical College, Chennai. The appellant was permitted to join the course and attend classes from the specified date. No costs were awarded. The court directed the government pleader to communicate the orders to the concerned authorities for compliance.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a native of Tamil Nadu, applied for selection to the MBBS course under the Tamil Nadu State Quota. Despite submitting all necessary documents to establish her nativity, her name was omitted from the rank list. The Writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition, citing a clear prohibition in the prospectus of Tamil Nadu, and held that the petitioner had approached the court with unclean hands. The court, however, allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the order and permitting the appellant to join the MBBS course.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no fraud or false statement made in the supporting affidavit to the writ petition. It held that the observations and decision of the Writ Court were unwarranted and that the appellant had not made any distorted or false statement before the court. The court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the order and permitting the appellant to join the MBBS course.
Issues: The main issue was the consideration of the appellant's claim for admission to the MBBS course in Tamil Nadu based on her nativity. The court also addressed the allegation of the appellant approaching the court with unclean hands.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that there was no fraud or false statement made in the supporting affidavit to the writ petition. It held that the observations and decision of the Writ Court were unwarranted and that the appellant had not made any distorted or false statement before the court. The court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the order and permitting the appellant to join the MBBS course.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was allowed, and the order directing automatic cancellation of the allotment granted to the petitioner to pursue the MBBS Course in Government Stanley Medical College, Chennai was set aside. The appellant was permitted to join the course and attend classes from the specified date. No costs were awarded. The court directed the government pleader to communicate the orders to the concerned authorities for compliance.
S. MANIKUMAR, J.
1. Challenge in this writ appeal is to an order dated 06.07.2018 made in W.P. No. 16223 of 2018.
2. It is the case of the appellant that she was born in Chennai and native, Tamil Nadu. Her father was employed as a Scientist in the Institute of Plasma Research, an aided concern of Department of Atomic Energy, Gujarat, wherein she had to undergo her education. Her father is presently working as Scientific Officer (G) in the above Research Institute. She had commenced and completed her schooling in Gujarat, because of the employment of her father. She had secured 531 marks, out of 700 and her overall percentage is 92.97% in the Secondary Education Board, Gujarat. Being native of Tamil Nadu and having taken part in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET), she had applied for selection to MBBS course, under the Tamil Nadu State Quota.
3. The appellant has further submitted that on the basis of scrutiny and with reference to her claim for admission in Tamil Nadu, her application was verified and she was assigned Registration No. 40005816. Since she was residing with her parents, she had mentioned her Gujarat address, sequel to which, Centre was assigned at Gandhi Nagar, Ahmedabad. She took part in NEET eligibility test and secured 500 out 720. She belongs to Vadugar community, classified as Backward Class.
4. The appellant has further submitted that Clause 3 of the prospectus, describes Nativity and she has satisfied the same, by submitting the following conditions, viz.
(i) Candidate should be native of Tamil Nadu.
(ii) Candidate who have applied for NEET UG-2018 as a person from other State cannot claim as a Native of Tamil Nadu.
(iii) Candidate who are native of Tamil Nadu, but studied from Standard VI to Standard XII outside Tamil Nadu either partly or completely in one or more States should produce the true copies of their parent's certificates such as Birth Certificate/SSLC/10th/12th/ Degree/Diploma/Professional course and Ration Card/Passport to substantiate their place of birth in Tamil Nadu, to establish the relationship between the parent and the candidate along with the Nativity Certificate of the candidate. Otherwise, they will be considered under open category.
(iv) It is made clear that the candidate should have applied for NEET UG-2018 as a candidate of Tamil Nadu.
5. The appellant has further submitted that the respondent published the rank list on 28.06.2018, in which, her name has been omitted, despite having obtained 500 marks and upon enquiry, she came to know that since the address for communication and that of the centre, where she took her examination were at Gujarat, her merit claim seems to have been omitted to be considered, when the fact remains that she had submitted her application as Native of Tamil Nadu and to the said effect, she had fortified her claim by producing her nativity Certificate, as well as that of the parents. Despite production of all the documents, her claim has not been considered at the appropriate place, for assignment of ranking, as per her marks obtained in NEET.
6. According to the appellant, as per the prospectus, as many as 10 documents by the candidate and around 7 to 8 documents by the parents, are to be submitted for the purpose of consideration. A perusal of those requirements would go to show that appellant's claim shall merit consideration, on the following, inter-alia:-
(i) Nativity Certificate of having born and resided at Door No. 2/7, Subramaniya Street, Perambur, Chennai.
(ii) Nativity Certificate to establish that having studied from 6th to 12th standard outside Tamil Nadu in another State, but the Birth Certificate exhibits that she was born on 10.2.2001 at Chetput, Chennai.
(iii) Community Certificate issued by the Competent Authority of Perambur Taluk, Chennai.
7. The appellant has further submitted that as per the eligibility criteria,
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
