Anand S. Biji Vs. State of Kerala & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1944 of 1993
Petitioner: Anand S. Biji
Respondent: State of Kerala & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1944 of 1993
Judges: S. RAJENDRA BABU & DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 27, 2001
Head Note:
EDUCATION
Constitution
(a) Articles 14, 15(4) – Additional eligibility criteria for filling 15% all India quota of states. Held that it is not open for states to fix additional quota as per Harish Pratap Sisodia’s case (JT 1999 (1) SC 313) and hence, no fresh directions. (Paras 2, 3)
(b) Articles 14, 15(4) – 15% all India quota in M.B.B.S/B.D.S – Seats if to be only approved by medical council. Held that no seat can be conceived which is not approved by MCI. No separate directions required. (Para 4)
(c) Article 15(4) – Admission to postgraduate course – Condition of having completed internship by 31st March of that year – Proposal for provisional admission as some may be completing by 31st March. Held that this aspect need not be considered at this stage. (Paras 5, 6)
Cases Reffered:
1. Harish Pratap Sisodia v. Union of India & Ors.(JT 1999 (1) SC 313) (Para 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. The problems faced in the matter of implementing the scheme framed by this Court for admission to postgraduate medical courses are raised in these I.As.
2. The learned Solicitor General asked us to make clear certain aspects for smooth implementation of the scheme of admission into medical colleges and in particular, those pertaining to the 15% all India quota. It is submitted that the states and colleges should not insist upon satisfaction of the “state requirements” as a condition to grant admission to the allottees against the 15% all India quota. He elaborated that the states are imposing conditions on the candidates admitted to postgraduate courses in the colleges, for example, the Government of Gujarat requires the postgraduate students to execute a bond of Rs. 75,000/- for rendering 3 years rural service in the state as prescribed by the state government. Similarly, Government of Maharashtra has imposed a condition that candidate would have to serve the Government of Maharashtra for a period of one year as medical officer in any of the PHC/RHC in the state prior to admission to the postgraduate course. Thus the result is that different states have imposed different conditions. Candidate admitted under the all India quota under different state medical colleges are not uniformly placed. While some of the candidates have to fulfil those requirements, others are not required to do so.
3. Indeed in this regard, a three judge bench of this Court in Harish Pratap Sisodia v. Union of India & Ors. (JT 1999 (2) SC 313), has stated as follows :-
“It is not disputed that the criteria of eligibility of allotment of a seat to MBBS against the 15% all India quota has been fixed by the CBSE in consultation with the Medical Council of India under a modified scheme approved by this Court. Under that scheme, the states and colleges cannot insist upon satisfaction of the “state requirements” as a condition to grant admission to the allottees against the 15% all India quota. It is, therefore, not open to any state to fix any additional eligibility criteria in cases of candidates who fall under the 15% all India quota. The eligibility criteria having been approved by this Court, it could not be ignored by the dean, medical college, Solapur.”
In view of this direction, no fresh direction in this regard is required.
4. He further submitted that since the criteria of eligibility for allotment of seat to MBBS against the 15% all India quota having been fixed by CBSE in consultation with the Medical Council of India under a modified scheme approved by this Court, those seats must be only in respect of the seats approved by the Medical Council of India. In other words, the seats in 15% all India quota should include only those seats which have been approved by the Medical Council of India. This aspect is patent on the face of it as we cannot conceive of any seats not approved by the Medical Council of India in any college. Therefore, allotment of seats cannot be in respect of a seat not approved by the Medical Council of India. Hence, no separate direction is needed in this regard.
5. Lastly, he pointed out that the candidates who have not completed internship but would complete it by 31st March each year may be admitted provisionally within 15 days from the date of personal counselling subject to the condition that such students should submit proof of completion of their internship by 7th April to the concerned college. This request is made because one of the conditions for admission to postgraduate courses from the all India quota is that the candidate would have completed internship by 31st March of that year.
6. This aspect also need not be considered at this stage. If in any specific case any state or university or institution raises problem, the same could be appropriately dealt with depending upon exigencies of the situation.
7. I.As. are disposed of accordingly.
1. The problems faced in the matter of implementing the scheme framed by this Court for admission to postgraduate medical courses are raised in these I.As.
2. The learned Solicitor General asked us to make clear certain aspects for smooth implementation of the scheme of admission into medical colleges and in particular, those pertaining to the 15% all India quota. It is submitted that the states and colleges should not insist upon satisfaction of the “state requirements” as a condition to grant admission to the allottees against the 15% all India quota. He elaborated that the states are imposing conditions on the candidates admitted to postgraduate courses in the colleges, for example, the Government of Gujarat requires the postgraduate students to execute a bond of Rs. 75,000/- for rendering 3 years rural service in the state as prescribed by the state government. Similarly, Government of Maharashtra has imposed a condition that candidate would have to serve the Government of Maharashtra for a period of one year as medical officer in any of the PHC/RHC in the state prior to admission to the postgraduate course. Thus the result is that different states have imposed different conditions. Candidate admitted under the all India quota under different state medical colleges are not uniformly placed. While some of the candidates have to fulfil those requirements, others are not required to do so.
3. Indeed in this regard, a three judge bench of this Court in Harish Pratap Sisodia v. Union of India & Ors. (JT 1999 (2) SC 313), has stated as follows :-
“It is not disputed that the criteria of eligibility of allotment of a seat to MBBS against the 15% all India quota has been fixed by the CBSE in consultation with the Medical Council of India under a modified scheme approved by this Court. Under that scheme, the states and colleges cannot insist upon satisfaction of the “state requirements” as a condition to grant admission to the allottees against the 15% all India quota. It is, therefore, not open to any state to fix any additional eligibility criteria in cases of candidates who fall under the 15% all India quota. The eligibility criteria having been approved by this Court, it could not be ignored by the dean, medical college, Solapur.”
In view of this direction, no fresh direction in this regard is required.
4. He further submitted that since the criteria of eligibility for allotment of seat to MBBS against the 15% all India quota having been fixed by CBSE in consultation with the Medical Council of India under a modified scheme approved by this Court, those seats must be only in respect of the seats approved by the Medical Council of India. In other words, the seats in 15% all India quota should include only those seats which have been approved by the Medical Council of India. This aspect is patent on the face of it as we cannot conceive of any seats not approved by the Medical Council of India in any college. Therefore, allotment of seats cannot be in respect of a seat not approved by the Medical Council of India. Hence, no separate direction is needed in this regard.
5. Lastly, he pointed out that the candidates who have not completed internship but would complete it by 31st March each year may be admitted provisionally within 15 days from the date of personal counselling subject to the condition that such students should submit proof of completion of their internship by 7th April to the concerned college. This request is made because one of the conditions for admission to postgraduate courses from the all India quota is that the candidate would have completed internship by 31st March of that year.
6. This aspect also need not be considered at this stage. If in any specific case any state or university or institution raises problem, the same could be appropriately dealt with depending upon exigencies of the situation.
7. I.As. are disposed of accordingly.
