FURKHAN ALI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these petitions are filed by students seeking a direction directing the 2nd respondent to allot seats to the petitioners in the 3rd respondent-College.

(2.) IN W. P. No. 43830 of 2004 the prayer is slightly modified. Facts, grounds and the law in all these cases are common. Matters were heard by clubbing all these petitions by this Court and a common order is passed.

(3.) FACTS in brief are as under.-Petitioner, Sandeep in W. P. No. 43629 of 2004 appeared for CET examination and he secured medical rank of 12777. He is qualified and eligible for admission to the MBBS course. He belongs to 3-A category. He appeared for Counselling on 14-9-2004 and on 26-9-2004. He was unsuccessful in getting admission under 60% Government quota seats in terms of a formula evolved between the Government and the management of private medical colleges. The 3rd respondent-College was not included in seat matrix published by the 2nd respondent in view of the fact that the Medical council of India had passed an order prohibiting admissions to the 3rd respondent-College for the academic year 2004-05. The 3rd respondent filed a writ petition in this Court and the said writ petition came to be rejected by this Court. Writ appeal was filed by respondent 3 in W. A. Nos. 2400 to 2402 of 2004. Division Bench differed in their opinion. Matter was referred to a third learned Judge. The majority view was that it is permissible for the 3rd respondent-College to make admission for the academic year 2004-05 in terms of the intake fixed by the Central government. A writ was issued in terms of Annexure-C. The 3rd respondent-College was part of the Consortium of Medical, Engineering and Dental Colleges of Karnataka (COMED-K ). Petitioner appeared for the COMED-K examination and secured rank of 4068. A telegram was given by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner to appear for Counselling for admission to the MBBS course under the Management quota. Petitioner appeared and was not give a seat under the management quota. He thereafter contacted the 2nd respondent to find out whether counselling would be conducted for admission to the Government quota seats. He was informed that no Counselling would be conducted since the last date fixed for admission was 30-9-2004. He contacted the management of the 3rd respondent-College and was informed that in the event of CET cell allotting students under the Government quota, they will be admitted to the MBBS course and that the College is proceeding to make admissions under the management quota. Petitioner reliably learnt that the 2nd respondent would not be conducting counselling for admission under the Government quota. Under these circumstances, directions are sought for by petitioner, Sandeep in W. P. No. 43629 of 2004.