Back
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
V. D. GYANI, A. G. QURESHI
P.S.DOSHI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M.P. - Respondents
MISC. PETN. 575 Of 1989
Decided On : 09/25/1989
The Court held that the rules for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in the State, are violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. The Court directed the State to suitably amend the rules so as to restore merit rather than preference, be it institutional or any other, in the light of the various decisions of the Supreme Court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, 23 in number, challenged the 'rules' for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in the State. The petitioners claimed a common competitive examination as recommended by the Supreme Court, while the State contended that since the number of candidates is limited and the principle of institutional continuity has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Dinesh Kumar's case (AIR 1986 SC 1877), it is neither necessary nor desirable to have common competitive test.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the rules providing for cent percent reservations based on institutional preference do not stand the test of Art. 14 of the Constitution. No reasons have been assigned by the respondents, much less compelling and strong reasons, as pointed out by the Supreme Court for exclusion of meritorious candidates while providing for reservations based on institutional preference rather than the order of merit. The Court also found that the weightages and bonus marks as given to the Assistant Surgeons for service rendered in a scheduled or rural areas or for sterilization operations do not bare any nexus to the object of selecting the best for postgraduate courses.
Issues: 1. Whether the rules for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in the State, are violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the weightages and bonus marks as given to the Assistant Surgeons for service rendered in a scheduled or rural areas or for sterilization operations are justified?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the rules providing for cent percent reservations based on institutional preference do not stand the test of Art. 14 of the Constitution. No reasons have been assigned by the respondents, much less compelling and strong reasons, as pointed out by the Supreme Court for exclusion of meritorious candidates while providing for reservations based on institutional preference rather than the order of merit. 2. The Court also found that the weightages and bonus marks as given to the Assistant Surgeons for service rendered in a scheduled or rural areas or for sterilization operations do not bare any nexus to the object of selecting the best for postgraduate courses.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the petition to the extent indicated. Petitioners are entitled to costs of this petition. Counsel's fee shall be Rs. 1000/-, if certified. The Court directed the State to suitably amend the rules so as to restore merit rather than preference, be it institutional or any other, in the light of the various decisions of the Supreme Court. It was made clear that candidates already found eligible for admission to P. G. Courses for the current session and those candidates who may be found eligible for admission to P. G. Courses for the period of further three years, shall not be affected in any way by this order and the delay, if any, caused due to the stay order passed by this Court, shall not come in the way of admission or attendance of such successful candidates in the current session of P. G. Courses.
( 1 ) BY this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners (in all 23) have challenged the 'rules' for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in the State.
( 2 ) IT is an admitted position that these admissions to Post-Graduate Courses are governed by executive instructions issued by the State Government under Art. 162 of the Constitution of India, although they are titled as Madhya Pradesh Selection for Post-Graduate Courses (Clinical, Para-clinical and Non-Clinical Courses) in Medical Colleges of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as P. G. Rules ). The rules pertaining to Diploma Courses are referred to as 'diploma Rules'. These rules have been annexed to the petition as Annexures P/1 and P/3. It may also be noted that though titled and called as 'rules', they are not statutory rules, but mere executive instructions.
( 3 ) THE petitioners have challenged categorisation of candidate as made under R. 3 of these Rules as wholly arbitrary and discriminatory, having no nexus with the object of selection - to select the best talent and the most meritorious ones. The weightages in evaluation of merits and deduction of marks, have also come under scaling attack by the petitioners.
( 4 ) INSTITUTIONALISED reservations or preferences in the matter of admissions to P. G. Courses in Medical Colleges is the theme of this petition and the whole argument built by Shri Kokje, learned counsel for the petitioners, on the basis of what the Supreme Court has been saying for almost about a decade, beginning with Dr. Jagdish Saran v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 820 and culminating with a very recent judgment in Dr. Sanjay Mehrotra v. G. S. V. M. Medical College, AIR 1989 SC 775.
( 5 ) THE respondent-State on the other hand, placing reliance on certain observations made by the Supreme Court in Dinesh Kumar v. M. L. N. Medical College, Allahabad, AIR 1986 SC 1877, sought to justify the reservations made under the 'rules'.
( 6 ) THE petitioners claim a common competitive examination as recommended by the Supreme Court, while the State contends that since the number of candidates is limited and the principle of institutional continuity has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Dinesh Kumar's case (AIR 1986 SC 1877) (supra), it is neither necessary nor desirable to have common competitive test.
( 7 ) BEFORE proceedings to deal with the contentions raised, it would not be out of place to note that a group of students had applied for being intervenors and we have heard their counsel Shri Chaphekar, as well. Few more facts, which need to be noted are that the Medical Colleges situated at Indore, Bhopal, Rewa, Gwalior, Jabalpur and Raipur in the State of Madhya Pradesh, all having Post-Gradaute Courses, are affiliated one each, to a different University. Thus, each University having only one Medical College affiliated to it (All Colleges having Post-Graduate Courses ).
( 8 ) THAT as desired and directed by the Supreme Court, provision has been made by the State Government and 25% of the total number of seats available, have now been earmarked and allocated for candidates passing the All India Competitive Examination. It is also significant to note that the respondent-State in its return does not dispute the position as averred by the petitioners that the total number of seats available for admission are determined as per Regulations of the Medical Council of India. The number of seats are revised every January, which depends on the availability of P. G. Teachers as on 31st December of the preceding year. ( 9 ) IT is an admitted position that as for merit quota, candidates are selected on the recommendations of the College and Hospital Council, known as P. G. Committee of the College, on the basis of merit amongst students passing from the
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
