JITHIN T N Vs. COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was a candidate, who took the Common entrance Examination for admission to Professional Degree Courses, in 2004. His rank was 563. He participated in the Centralised Allotment Process, held in july, 2004 and he was admitted on 30. 07. 2004 in the Medical College , run by the Academy of Medical Science , Pariyaram, kannur. When the admissions were made, everyone including the petitioner thought that the fees for the merit quota in the self-financing colleges will be the same, as in the Government Colleges. So, many students, who were having higher ranks and could have got admission in the Government Colleges, opted to be admitted in the self-financing colleges, under the merit quota. Later, the Apex Court , by an interim order, directed that for this year, the fee structure for the self-financing colleges will be, as recommended by Justice K. T. Thomas Committee. As a result, many students, who opted to join the self-financing colleges, even though, they were eligible to get admission in the Government Colleges, according to their rank will have to pay fees at the rate fixed by Justice K. T. Thomas Committee. To rectify this injustice, the government issued Ext. P8 notification, re-opening the allotment from rank no. 332 onwards. THE candidates, having rank upto 331 only opted for admission in Government Colleges. As a result of the issuance of this notification, the petitioner has to again attend a Centralised Counselling and his admission in the Pariyaram Medical College is under threat of cancellation. In the above background, this Writ Petition was filed challenging ext. P8.

(2.) THOUGH, several grounds were raised against Ext. P8, the main ground of attack, pressed at the time of hearing, is that it permits the students who stayed away at the time of earlier counselling also to participate in the second counselling and stake their claim for allotment of seats. The same, the petitioner submits, is contrary to the conditions contained in Ext. P1 prospectus and also the instructions contained in Ext. P4 information brochure. Reliance is placed on Clauses 11. 4 and 11. 10 (a) of Ext. P1prospectus. Clause 11. 4 reads as follows: Candidates are advised to strictly observe the date and time of his/her appearance for the allotment. A candidate who does not turn up for the allotment as per schedule, at the place and time notified, will forfeit his/her chance for admission, and will not be considered for admission to any future or arising vacancies, irrespective of the rank. However, if a candidate is not able to attend the allotment process on genuine grounds, the parent/guardian, or any authorised person can act as a proxy at the risk of the candidate, on production of authorisation letter in the form given in annexure-XIX. Authorisation letter once received will be considered as valid for the entire allotment process, unless it is revoked in writing by the candidate. An attested photocopy of the filled up authorisation letter should also be brought by the proxy at the time of first appearance. This attested copy should be produced at the time of subsequent appearance. Candidates who do not turn up for the allotment as per the schedule will forfeit their chance for admission, and will not be considered for admissions to any future vacancies, irrespective of the rank". A reading of the above clause would show that a candidate, who does not turn up for the allotment as per the schedule, at the place and time notified, will forfeit his/her chance for admission. Clause 11. 10 (a) reads as follows: "allotment memos will be issued to the selected candidates at the end of allotment process. It is obligatory for the candidate to report to the college to which he/she is allotted. No extension of time for reporting the college will be granted under any circumstances. Failure to appear before the Principal concerned for joining the course on the date and time fixed, will forfeit his/her admission to the course and he/she will not be considered for any future or arising vacancies". The said clause makes it mandatory for the student to join the college allotted, as per the allotment memo, within the stipulated time; otherwise, the admission will stand cancelled.

(3.) THE reason urged for re-opening the allotment, is that some more seats are available, as a result of the availability of seats in two more Medical Colleges, for which approval of the Medical Council was obtained later. THE allotment made earlier, to one of the Medical Colleges, had to be withheld as per the directions of the affiliated University. Similarly, the allotment made to a Homoeo Medical College was withheld as per the court directions. For starting two Dental Colleges, the approval of the Dental council was obtained subsequently. In view of the above developments, there was scope for admission to some more students and the same appears to be the reason for allowing the participation of the candidates in the second counselling, who did not attend the earlier counselling.