DHANARAM SINGROLE Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners has questioned the legality, propriety and correctne of arbitrary action of respondent No. 3 whereby the request of the petitioness for correction in the application form for Pre-Medical Test (PMT) was not allowed, as a result of which petitioner No. 2 has not been considered for admission in the 1st year of MBBS course in the category of Freedom Fighters

(2.) PETITIONERS ' case is that petitioner No. 2 being qualified to appear in the Pre-Medical Test, 2004 (PMT) conducted by respondent Nos. 2&3 applied for the same his application form was also accepted. For conducting PMT examination in the State of Chhattisgarh for Government Medical College, Raipur & Dental College, Rajnandgaon rules known as 'PMT Examination Admission Rules, 2004' has been issued. As per sub-rule (5) of Rule 4; 3% horizontal reservation was made for the freedom fighters. Explanation 3 of sub-rule (5) envisages that the son, daughter, grandson & granddaughter of a freedom fighter will be entitled to take benefit of the said reservation. Explanation further lays down that 'freedom fighter' means a person whose name is registered in the list of freedom fighter kept in the office of the Collector of the District concerned and under this category only those candidates shall be eligible who fulfill the qualification prescribed under Rule 3.2 with respect to domicile. A candidate seeking admission under this category has to produce a certificate issued by the Collector of the district concerned in the prescribed format. Petitioner No. 2 appeared in the examination as a general category candidate which was held from 04-6-2004 to 06-06-2004 and result of which was declared on 28-6-2004. In the said examination petitioner No. 2 secured 151 rank in the merit list, as he obtained 549 marks out of total marks. Petitioners' further case is that immediately after 2-3 days from submitting the application form, he realized the mistake of having not filled the clause of freedom fighter in the application form, accordingly, petitioners rushed to the office of respondent No. 3-Board of Secondary Education, Raipur on 30-4-2004 at 3 p.m. and made an application form along with certificate to the Secretary of respondent No. 3-Board for making correction in the application form. Copy of the application for correction, copy of the freedom fighter certificate and copy of the receipt showing deposit of the application are Annexures P-7, P-8 & P-9 to the writ petition. As the bank time was over, therefore, the petitioners could not prepare a bank draft, but they told the Deputy Secretary namely Shri Goel that they are ready and willing to deposit the prescribed fee, then he referred the matter to Shri Borkar, Coordinator, but the deposit could not be made. However, petitioners were given assurance that their application would be considered strictly in accordance with law. Manwhile, examination was conducted and immediately, after the examination, the petitioners wrote a letter-dated 07-07-2004 to respondent No. 3, copy of which along with postal receipt is Annexure P-12 to the writ petition. On receiving no response from the side of the respondent No. 3 Board, the petitioners again wrote a letter on 16-7-2004, thereafter again wrote a letter on 06-8-2004. But respondents could not give any proper consideration to the applications made by the petitioners and ultimately respondent no. 4 issued call letter dated 14-8-2004 for counseling on 02-09- 2004 showing petitioner No. 2 as a general candidate without making any reference to his applications and his rank has been shown as 152. Copy of the recent certificate dated 7-7-2004 is marked as Annexure P-16. Therefore, the action of respondent No. 3 in not considering petitioner No. 2 as a candidate of freedom fighter category is arbitrary. Ultimately, it has been prayed that respondent No. 3 be directed to consider the application for correction filed by the petitioners in accordance with the law and direct respondent No. 3 to include the name of the petitioner No. 2 in the list of freedom fighters quota.

(3.) RETURN has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 4 in which it has been mentioned that Rules of Admission prescribed reservation for freedom furthers quota only for those candidates who are either the son and daughter of the freedom fighters or sons's son and son's daughter of a freedom fighters. The Rules have been framed in Hindi and use of word "Poutra" clearly signifies without any iota of doubt that it is meant only for son & daughter, son's son & son's daughter of a freedom fighter. By necessary implication, it excludes all other relatives of freedom fighter, which would incidentally include daughter's son/daughter's daughter. Similar is the position contained in the rules of admission framed by respondent No. 4 for its institution which were published in Hindi as well as in English also, copy of which is Annexure R-4/1 to the return filed by respondent No. 4. The explanatory part of the Rules framed clearly shows that in the event of any doubt/discrepancy, Hindi version shall be applicable. In the instant rules also the benefit of quota freedom fighter is confined to sons and daughters of a freedom fighter and sons's son and son's daughter of a freedom fighter. The petitioner have failed to produce the relevant eligibility certificate as required under the rules of admission framed by the Board of Secondary Education as also by respondent No. 4. The petition is also liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay, waiver and acquiescence. On petitioners' own admission, petitioner No. 2 had applied in the entrance examination conducted by the Secondary Board of Education for admission to Government Medical College, Raipur and Dental College at Rajnandgaon and at that time the petitioner No. 2 did not submit any certificate as required under the rules framed by the Board, if the petitioners made any representation, all this exercise by the petitioners was in vain. It the petitioners had any such grievance, petitioners ought to have immediately approached the appropriate. Forum available to him under the law for redressal of the grievances. It is an admitted fact that petitioner No. 2 neither filed any petition against the respondent Board nor did he seek any relief for admission against freedom fighter category in Raipur Medical College and Rajnandgaon Dental College. Having not claimed any admission in Raipur Medical College or Rajnandgaon Dental College for which he had originally submitted an application from and appeared in the PMT examination conducted by the respondent Board, the petitioner is waived all their rights, if any, and having not claimed any relief from any forum available to them under the law. Even at the time when respondent No. 4 had initially published its programme for counseling which was scheduled to be held on 2nd and 3rd September 2004, no such petition was filed. However, since the counseling was to be re-scheduled in view of the judicial intervention in another writ petition, at this stage now, petitioners are coming forward to agitate a belated and waived right. Now the counseling is scheduled to be held on 17th & 18th September 2004 and there is only one payment seat against freedom fighter category. Respondent No. 4 borrowed list prepared by the respondent Board for making admission in the Medical College run by it. All kinds of enquiry etc. with regard to claim of all the categories have already been made by the respondent Board and respondent No. 4 is to strictly go by the merit list as made available to it by the Director of the Medical Education and when the counseling is to commence on 17-9-2004 & 18-9-2004, it is practically not possible to allow any change, alteration or modification in the merit list as a whole relating to different categories.