( 1 ) THE petitioner, Vinod Sagar Sood, who unsuccessfully sought admission in any of the Medical Colleges in the State, seeks a direction to the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to consider his application "strictly on merits" and to admit him in any medical College. He also prays that Rule 5 of the "rules" framed by the government regulating admissions in Medical Colleges and the Dental College be declared ultra vires and quashed.

( 2 ) THE Government of Madhya Pradesh has laid down certain principles styled as

"rules for admission in Medical Colleges, and Dental College, 1966" for regulating admissions of students to these colleges. It has been laid down in these "rules" that selection of candidates from amongst those, who have applied for admission, will be made on merit as disclosed by the percentage of marks obtained in B. Sc. Part-I (Three years Degree Course) or its equivalent examination or in the B. Sc. Final or its equivalent examination, whichever is more favourable to the candidate; and that for assessing the merit of the candidates, who have taken more than the minimum number of years required to pass any of these examinations after the matriculation/ Higher Secondary Examination or the B. Sc. , Part-I Examination as the case may be, the aggregate percentage will be reduced by three for each extra year taken to pass the examination. The Rules prescribed that a candidate for admission, who has passed B. Sc. Part-I (Three Years Degree Course) Examination, or any equivalent examination, must have secured at least 45 p. c. marks in the aggregate taking the subjects mentioned in Rule 8 (1) (a) (i ). It has been stated in the Rules that seats not exceeding 3 p. c. may be reserved for sons and daughters of "political Sufferers", and that the Government will decide as to who are the sons and daughters of "political sufferers. "

( 3 ) THE petitioner says that he passed the B. Sc. Part-I Examination in 1965 from the Jiwaji University securing 51. 27 p. c. marks in the examination; and that the respondent No. 3, Vijay Kumar Premi, who failed in this examination in 1935 but passed the examination in 1966, secured only 48. 72 p. c. marks. His grievance is that though he secured 51. 27 p. c. marks, and the percentage of marks of the respondent No. 3. Vijay Kumar Premi, for the purpose of admission was 45. 72, after making a deduction of 3 p. c. on account of his failure in 1965, the respondent No. 3 was admitted in the Medical College, Indore, and he (petitioner)was not admitted in any Medical College. According to the applicant, the admission of the respondent No. 3 was made solely on the ground that he is a son of a "political Sufferer", and, in fact, he is not so

( 4 ) IN the return filed on behalf of the respondent-State, it is not denied that 3 p. c. of the seats were reserved for sons and daughters of "political Sufferers" and the respondent No. 3 was selected for admission on the ground of his being son of a "political Sufferer. " It has, however, been averred that the applicant took one extra year to pass the B. Sc. Part-I examination after passing the Higher secondary Examination, and consequently for the purposes of admission into a medical College the effective percentage of marks secured by him at the B. Sc. Part-1 examination was 48. 27 p. c. and that this percentage was so low that he had no chance absolutely of being selected even on merits even if none of the candidates claiming to be sons and daughters of "political Sufferers" had been considered for admission against the three per cent seats reserved for them. It has been further stated in the return that the "rules" governing admission in medical Colleges and the Dental College are merely executive instructions and have no statutory basis, and the selection of candidates for admission into the colleges was made strictly according to these "rules"; and that the "rules" being merely executive instructions, no question of any violation of Article 14 of the co