SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(MP) 74

G.G.SOHANI, N.D.OJHA
SANJAY PHADKE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M P – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
KULSHRESHTHA, V.S.KOKJE,

JUDGMENT :

( 1. ) BOTH these writ petitions challenge the vires of clauses (e) and (I) of Rule 8 of the Revised Rules for selection of candidates for appointment as House officers in the Medical Colleges which came into force with effect from 1-1-1984 and as such, are being decided by a common order.

( 2. ) THE petitioners of these two writ petitions, after passing their M. B. B. S. Examination and completing the internship, applied for appointment as House Officers, in the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore, which has been denied to them. In order to appreciate the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties in regard to the validity of sub-rules. (e) and (f) of Rule 8 aforesaid, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), it is necessary to quote the relevant provisions of the said Rules at this stage. A copy of the Rules has been attached as Annexure R-4 to the return filed on behalf of the respondents. Rule 6 reads as under :

"selection shall be made once in a year strictly on the basis of merit The polled merit list of all batches of candidates who have completed, or shall complete internship in the same calendar year, would be prepared by Dean concerned and noti













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top