STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. GOPAL D TIRTHANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted in all the special leave petitions.

(2.) IMPARTING instruction and giving education was philanthropy -a pious duty - in the past, and later a service. In recent times it has developed into a business and now it stands recognized as an industry. A sizeable amount of litigation centres around medical education. The national wealth of available seats is scarce while the aspirants, desirous of sharing such wealth, are numerous. Every attempt at laying down criteria for choosing the more deserving out of the several aspirants is subjected to challenge before the constitutional courts of the country. This time it is the State of Madhya Pradesh which is at the receiving end and the issue is quota of seats for in-service candidates. Carving out a quota for in-service candidates by the State government, assigning weightage for rural service, sub-classification within classification for women candidates who have rendered rural service, and holding of a separate eligibility test for determining the merit of in-service candidates as distinguished from open category candidates, are the issues canvassed before the High Court and reiterated before this Court by the parties especially the State of Madhya Pradesh. For the purpose of this judgment it is not necessary for us to enumerate the facts of each individual petition as there were many before the High Court. It would suffice to note the bones of contention in the backdrop of a few bare essential events in their chronological order.

(3.) TO be promoted as 'specialist/district health officer' the candidate must have rendered a particular length of service in the cadre of 'assistant surgeon' and should also have secured a postgraduate degree in medical science. So much is to picturise the need of doctors in civil services of the State of Madhya Pradesh. The services are starving for qualified personnel. This much is apparent.