1. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for following reliefs:

1. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents Nos. 3 & 4 to refund the tution fees of Rs.35,000/- deposited by the petitioner under protest on petitioner no. 2’s admission to Master of Surgery (Obsterics & Gynecology) Course along with interest @ 18% per annum.

2. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondents from demanding tution fees from the petitioners in future while prosecution of Master of Surgery (Obsterics & Gynecology) Course by the petitioner No.2.

2. Petitioner No.2 has obtained admission in Post Graduate MS (Obsterics & Gynecology) Course and petitioner No.1 is her father. The contention of the learned counsel is that petitioner no. 1 has undergone sterilization operation on 11.5.1989 and in this regard he has filed two documents Annexures-P-2 & P-3, hence, he is entitled to obtain back the tution fee of his daughter (petitioner No.2) which he deposited in the light of the circular of the State Government dated 6.7.1990 (Annexure-P-4).

3. Learned counsel further submitted that when all these facts were demonstrated to the Dean Medical College, Jabalpur (respondent No.4), he did not agree and in these adverse facts and circumstances the petitioner has deposited tution fee, so that the admission of petitioner no. 2 may not be cancelled. However, looking to the mandate as well as assurance given by the State Government, the petitioners are entitled for the benefit in terms of said circular (Annexure P-4). Hence, it has been prayed by the learned counsel that the tution fee which was deposited be refunded to the petitioners.

4. Per contra, Shri Ashish Agnihotri, learned Government Advocate by placing reliance on a later circular of the State Government dated 17.10.2007 has submitted that the said benefit can be extended only once and not for the second time and therefore, even though no specific order has been passed by the Dean Medical College to return the tution fee, since the circular dated 17.10.2007 (Annexure-P-9) has superseded the earlier circular (Annexure-P4) dated 6.7.2010 it should be given effect to and hence the petitioners are not entitled for any relief.

5. Considered the rival contentions of the learned counsels for the parties and after having heard them, I am of the view that this petition deserves to be allowed.

6. On bare perusal of circular of State Government dated 6th July 1990 (Annexure- P-4) it is gathered that the State Government in order to promote the scheme of sterilization so as to check the population of the country, exempted the tution fee to the children of the parents of green card holders. True, this circular has been superseded by later circular dated 17.10.2007 which has been annexed as Annexure- P-9, -but according to me this circular would not debar the petitioners from the exemption of tution fee for the simple reason that in clause 2 of the said circular it has been clarified by the State Government that this circular will not be applicable to the persons who had already undergone the said sterilization operation prior to 13.5.2003.

7. In this context, I would like to refer sub-par (3) of clause 1 of the said circular which reads thus:-

¼3½ ‘kkldh; Lo’kklh ‘kkldh; fpfdRlk egkfo|ky;@vfHk;kaf=dh egkfo|ky;@ikWfyVsfDud egkfo|ky; vkS|ksfxd@izf’k{k.k laLFkkuksa esa f’k{k.k ‘kqYd dk ykHk dsoy ,d ckj gh fMxzh@ikB~;dze ds fy, izkIr gksxk A

I would also like to quote clause 2 which reads thus :-

2- ,sls xzhu dkMZ /kkjdksa dks ftuds )kjk fnukad 13-5-2003 ls iwoZ ulcanh djkbZ xbZ gS dks bl vkns’k ls iwoZ izpfyr izko/kkuksa ds vuq:i lqfo/kk;sa izkIr gksrh jgsaxh A fnukad 13-5-2003 ds i’pkr~ ulcanh djus okys mUgha O;fDr;ksa dks mDr lqfo/kk;sa izkIr gksaxh tks xjhch js[kk ds uhps thou ;kiu djus okyksa dh Js.kh esa vkrs gS A

I have no scintilla of doubt in holding that this circular would not debar the petitioner from the bene