LAWS(SC)-1994-3-50

MAMTA VITHAL SHETTY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On March 18, 1994
Mamta Vithal Shetty Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) Heard counsel on both sides.

(3.) The petitioners Dr Mamta and Dr Aparna were students of recognised private medical colleges and they were seeking admission to post-graduate courses. An advertisement was issued on 31/1/1994 by which applications were invited from registered medical graduates who had passed the final MBBS examination for Degree/diploma for January 1994 Session. However, by the said advertisement the graduates eligible to apply were restricted to those who had passed the examination from Dr V. M. Medical College, Sholapur, and government Medical College, Miraj. It is not in dispute that both these are government Medical Colleges. To put it differently, students who had graduated from all other recognised registered medical institutions were kept out of the competition. The grievance of the said students belonging to the recognised private medical colleges was that this was in violation of the guidelines laid down by this court in the case of Unni Krishnan, J. P. v. State ofa. P. The scheme evolved by the court in Unni Krishnan case is to be found in paragraphs 206 to 214 of the judgment. Clauses (2 and (4 of paragraph 210 are relevant for our purposes. In pursuance of this decision the government of maharashtra, Medical Education and Drugs Department by resolution dated 23/6/1993, worked out the scheme, the main features whereof were indicated in paragraphs 1 to 5 thereof. Paragraph 2 stated that the Dean will pool together the post-graduate seats of government Medical Colleges and seats of post- graduate courses of private medical institutions and thereafter issue an advertisement in respect of those seats for admission on merit-cum-choice basis. The seats allotted to private medical institutions had to be worked out in those colleges after the students were assigned to those colleges. Those colleges were required to pay a stipend at the rate at which the same was paid in government medical Colleges. The import of this government resolution was that students of both the government Medical Colleges and private medical colleges were to be pooled together and therefrom the choice was to be made on merit basis and thereafter those students were to be assigned to different colleges, both government and private, where post-graduation facilities were available. In the present case what the authorities did was to restrict the competition among students belonging to Dr V. M. Medical College, Sholapur, and government medical College, Miraj, thereby denying graduates from private medical colleges, the right to compete. The High court has pointed out that by a subsequent resolution dated 11/8/1993 the government decided not to implement the scheme contained in the resolution of 23/6/1993 because the medical council of India had objected to P. G. Course being conducted by some of the private medical institutions and also because matters pertaining to eligibility of such students to the P. G. Course was under dispute. It has further pointed out that Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences was not given permission to conduct the P. G. Course. That may be so and, therefore, the question of admission to P. G. Course in institutes which did not meet with the approval of the Medical council of India, may be a matter falling within the grey area and to that extent the seats would get reduced. But nowhere has it been stated that graduates who have obtained the MBBS degree from private recognised medical institutions shall not be entitled to compete for admission to P. G. Courses on seats available in institutes with regard to which the Medical council of India has not raised any objection. Therefore, the High court, with respect, proceeded on an erroneous premise in affirming the action of the authorities. A government resolution dated 1/1/1994 shows that a committee has been appointed by the State government to consider the rule for admission to P. G. Courses in private medical colleges/institutions along with the government Medical Colleges. The appointment of such a committee can only be for future admissions to P. G. Courses and can have no relation to admission to P. G. Courses prior to that date. The learned counsel for the State government also pointed out that selections had already been made on the basis of the above but we think the presentation of a fait accompli is not something on which rights of eligible students can be sacrificed.