MINOR S SUNAYANA Vs. MINOR S SUNAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner applied for admission to the First Year MBBS Degree Course under seats earmarked for eminent Sports Persons. Her Cut off mark is 285.85 out of 300. The grievance of the petitioner is that after the eligibility for admission under eminent Sports person category, the candidates so found eligible should be selected and admitted only on the basis of academic marks and not on the basis of the marks awarded for the certificates in Sports. According to the petitioner, for the three seats, the following is the comparative chart of marks of the petitioner and the selected candidates: <FRM>MAH.B.1003.241205.htm</FRM>

(2.) The respondents 4 to 6 who have secured lesser academic marks have been selected as they secured higher marks for the excellence in Sports. Hence the petitioner has filed W.P.No.21224/2003 for a Writ of Declaration, declaring that Appendix III (1) and the allotment of marks for participation, achievements and over all championship in Appendix III 2(A), (B), (C)and (D) in the prospectus for MBBS/BDS Admission for the year 2003-2004 is illegal, unreasonable, void and arbitrary. The petitioner has also filed W.P.No.21225/2003 for declaration that the selection of respondents 4 to 6 is illegal, unreasonable and arbitrary and for consequential direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to admit her in the MBBS Course for the academic year 2003-2004.

(3.) The question for consideration in these Writ Petitions is as to whether after the award of marks to the excellence in sports on the basis of the certificates produced by the candidates viz., eminent Sports Persons and found them eligible for consideration for admission under the quota, the further selection and admission should be made on the basis of the marks awarded to the excellence in Sports or on the basis of the academic marks. Similar question came up for consideration before this Court in the judgment reported in KHALID HUSSAIN VS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, GOVERNMENTOF TAMIL NADU HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( A.I.R. 1987 W.L.R.91). Considering the fact that once the candidates are categorized depending upon the level of their achievement, this Court held that there is absolutely no possibility of further invidious distinction in determining the eminence in that particular category. That judgment also arose in respect of selection of candidates against the seats earmarked for eminent Sports Persons. The said judgment was confirmed by a Division Bench in W.A. No.1307/1986. The said judgment of the Division Bench was again taken to Apex Court and the Apex Court has confirmed the judgments in the judgment reported in A.I.R. 1987 SC 2074.