MONIKA MURMU Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Tribe category. She passed the MBBS examination from Vardhman Mahavir Medical College in the year 2006. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSI University) i.e. respondent No.1 invited applications from the candidates possessing MBBS degree recognized by MCI, and who had completed one year compulsory rotating internship for grant of admission to the post graduate medical degree and diploma courses being held in Safdarjung Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGMER), Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi (Dr. RML Hospital).

(2.) The petitioner applied in response to the said invitation and appeared in the Central Entrance Test (CET) conducted by respondent No.1. She was ranked 41 in the over all merit and stood first amongst ST candidates. Since the reservation policy laid down by Government of India was to apply to the admission process, which provided 15% reservation for SC candidates and 7.5% for ST candidates, the petitioner was hopeful of getting admission in a post graduate course of her choice. The petitioner was called for counseling on 9.5.2008. The respondent followed the 200 Point Model Roster Selection Scheme sent to it by the Government of India along with their communication dated 8.5.2008. As per the 200 Point Model Roster Selection Scheme the categorywise position in respect of the first 17 seats, with which we are concerned, is as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_394_LAWS(DLH)8_2008_1.html</FRM>

(3.) From the aforesaid it is seen that the first reserved seat for the ST candidate falls at serial No.14 of the Roster Point Selection Scheme. Accordingly, at the time of her counseling the petitioner was the 14th candidate to be called. It is the petitioner's case that at the time when she was called, she was informed of the vacancy position and at that point of time there were two vacant seats in MD (Medicine) in PGMER, Dr. RML Hospital. She opted for one of them. The form that she was provided was accordingly filled up by her, giving her option. When she was about to leave the counseling room, she was called back and informed that she could not be allotted the MD (Medicine) seat at PGMER, Dr. RML Hospital since there were only 7 P.G Degree seats in PGMER, Dr. RML Hospital allotted to the respondent University and hence no seat could be offered to a ST candidate. The petitioner further states that 4 out of the 6 counseling members supported her case by taking the stand that the entire University is to be treated as one unit for providing reservations, and not institution wise. Even the result as declared by the University shows that the intention was to treat the University as one unit. The petitioner pleaded that as per the reservation policy she was entitled to admission to the post graduate degree course in MD (Medicine) in PGMER, Dr. RML Hospital. However, she was forced to change her option and accordingly she changed her option to PG (Diploma) Course in Gynaecology against her wish. The petitioner was, at that stage, told that if she insisted on admission to PG Degree course in Medicine at PGMER, Dr. RML Hospital, she might run the risk of losing admission altogether at PGMER, Dr. RML Hopsital