DR MUVEEN KUMAR Vs. UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek direction to direct the respondent No.1 to accept the examination result of the petitioners and on their merit offer the petitioner in WPC No. 2508/11 Post Graduation Course of MD in Medicine and the petitioner in WPC No. 2796/11 Post Graduation Course of MD in Gynecology for the academic year 2011-2012.

(2.) Adumbrated facts of the two petitions are: WPC No 2508/11

(3.) Arguing for the petitioners, Mr.S.D.Salwan, learned counsel submitted that there is no embargo as per the Admission Brochure, Medical Council of India Rules or any other law to deny admission to the petitioner in the following year after the petitioners had surrendered their seats in the previous year. Counsel also submitted that the only penalty provided in the said admission brochure is that if such a candidate surrenders his/her seat then he/she will have to forfeit the bond amount of Rs. 3 lacs and which the petitioner in the writ petition no. 2796/2011 had forfeited while in the other petition bearing no. W.P.(C) No. 2508/2011 the respondent-University had agreed not to forfeit the bond amount. Counsel also submitted that no undertaking in the format (Annexure-I) was obtained from the petitioners and in view of non-submission of the said undertaking by these petitioners, the embargo laid down in clause 6.2.4 would not operate against the petitioners and therefore, there was no bar on the petitioners to appear in the next year after having surrendered their seats in the previous year. Referring to clause 6.2.4 of the Admission Brochure, the counsel submitted that the said clause only envisages that the candidates who are already admitted to any post graduate medical degree or diploma course as on the date of the counseling, will not be eligible for admission. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners was that as regards these petitioners, none of them were admitted in any of the post graduate medical degree or diploma course as on the date of the counseling because of the fact that they had surrendered their seats in the previous year, therefore, this clause 6.2.4 would not come in the way of the respondent to deny admission to the petitioners. Mr.S.D.Salwan further submitted that Dr.Nidhi, petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2796/2011, joined the course on 31.05.2010 and surrendered the seat on 29.06.2010, while Dr.Muveen, petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2508/2011 joined the course on 31.05.2010 and he remained with R.M.L.Hospital till August, 2010, whereafter he stopped working and then ultimately he surrendered the said seat on 10.01.2011.