LAWS(MAD)-2005-9-47

M ASHIQ NIHMATHULLAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On September 08, 2005
M. ASHIQ NIHMATHULLAH Appellant
V/S
GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these writ petitions, this Court is called upon to decide as to whether the award of one mark for every year of Rural service under the Director of Medical and Rural Health Services or Director of Public Health Controlled INstitutions up to a maximum of 10 marks to in-service candidates for consideration of their admissions to Higher Speciality Courses in Medicine is justified. The relevant clauses in the Prospectus are as follows: 50) The merit list for each discipline of the Higher Speciality Course will be prepared by computing the entrance examination marks and service marks which will be calculated to a maximum of 100 (Entrance Mark 90 + Service Mark 10). Rural services marks will be added to the total aggregate marks of the service candidates. 51)a) The INdividual Mark (Service/Non-service) is calculated by computing the marks secured by the candidate in the Entrance Examination and Service Marks of one mark for each year after completion of the P.G. Degree which is calculated from the last date of the month of passing examination (E.g. If a candidate scores 50 marks out 90 marks in Entrance examination and completed two years after P.G. Degree on the date of Entrance Examination, his/her total Aggregate Marks Will be 50+2=52). b) Service Candidates will be awarded one mark for every year of Rural service under the Director of Medical and Rural Health Services or Director of Public Health Controlled INstitutions up to a maximum of 10 marks. These rural service marks as on the date of Entrance Examination will be added to the Total aggregate marks while preparing the Merit list. Rural service marks will be Calculated based on the length of service rendered in Primary Health Centres alone. 63) a) The selection will be made by counseling based only on merit and no communal reservation will be followed. 50% of the seats will be made available as Open Competition for selection among both service/non-service candidates 50% of the seats will be made available only for Service candidates. IN case of odd number seat remaining vacant that seat shall be selected as per merit among both Service and Non-service candidates put together. 50% of seats in each college are reserved for service candidates whether they are selected under open or service quota. b) If there are non-service candidates opting for any Higher Speciality course, the same will be allotted to service candidates

(2.) IN exercise of powers under Article 162 of the Constitution, the State Government issue Government Orders, which are normally known as policy Government Orders each year, prescribing eligibility norms, educational qualifications, minimum age requirements, source of admission etc., apart from prescribing the communal rule of reservation.

(3.) A prospectus issued with regard to admission to educational courses is a declaration to the candidates that a field for development of educational potentialities is available for exploration and that there could be a chance of success. It is a piece of information. However, the norms and rules that should guide and should be adopted for selection must not be unreasonable, arbitrary or discriminatory. Normally prospectus is binding not only on the candidates but also on the State including the machinery appointed by the State for identifying the candidates for selection and admission. The Principle that the prospectus is binding on all persons concerned has been laid by the Supreme Court in PUNJAB ENGINEERING COLLEGE, CHANDIGARH VS SANJAY GULATI (A.I.R. 1983 SC 580). Following the same, a Division Bench of this Court has also observed in RATHNASWAMY, DR.A. VS DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION (1986 Writ Law Reporter 207) that the rules and norms of the prospectus are to be strictly and solemnly adhered to. The same view is also taken by another Division Bench of this Court in NITHIYAN.P. AND S.P. PRASANNA VS STATE OF TAMIL NADU (1994 Writ Law Reporter 624).