P G MEDICAL SANGHARS COMMITTEE Vs. BAJRANG SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals involve a challenge to the powers as well as the right of the State Government to provide for reservation of seats for admission to Post-Graduate Medical Courses for in-service candidates and the reasonableness or otherwise of the extent up to which such reservations could be made. Before the learned single Judge, challenge was made to the decision of the Government/University fixing 33% to be the qualifying marks for in-service candidates to render them eligible for admission to the post-graduate courses. The second ground of challenge was to the decision of the Government to increase the reservation of seats for admission into post- graduate courses for in-service candidates from 25% to 50% out of the remaining 75% of the seats after excluding 25% of the seats reserved for central quota.

(2.) The learned single Judge by his order dated 22-2-1998 repelled the challenge based on the first ground that held that the State, which is authorised to regulate the admissions to post-graduate courses of Medicine by prescribing minimum qualifying marks in the entrance examination therefor, is entitled, as in this case, to fix a minimum of 33% for the in-service candidates, and that this could not be said to be illegal. So far as the second ground of challenge was concerned, it met with the acceptance of the learned single Judge, who came to the conclusion that there was no justification made by placing materials on record for directing such an increase in the matter of reservation from 25% to 50% and the same was liable to be set aside as excessive, while maintaining, at the same time, the earlier prescribed reservation up to 25%.

(3.) Aggrieved, the State of Rajasthan as well as some of the in-service candidates filed appeals before a Division Bench and the Division Bench by its judgment dated 13-7-1999 set aside the order of the learned single Judge in so far as he interfered with the increase in the percentage of reservation made for in-service candidates from 25% to 50% on the ground that not only the State had such powers to prescribe on such matters as a matter of policy, but the learned single Judge, who sustained such powers to inhere in the State, could not have interfered with the policy decision of the State Government necessitating such increase from 25% to 50% for in-service candidates for admission to post-graduate courses in the Medical Colleges of the State, particularly when the policy-decision was based on reasons which had nexus to the objects sought to be achieved. In the light of the above, the Division Bench thought it unnecessary to examine further whether the increase of seats from 25% to 50% for in-service candidates pertains to the area of reservation or fixing the source of admission. The appeals were accepted and allowed.