S MOHAMMED MUBEEN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of writ of declaration that the selection of the third respondent in the Pondicherry General quota for the first year M. B. B. S. course session 1994-95 in the Jawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical education and Research, (for short, JIPMER), and direct the first and second respondents to cancel the seat allotted to the third respondent and to allot the same to the petitioner.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the case of the petitioner is that he applied for admission to the M. B. B. S. course in JIPMER, Pondicherry for the academic year 1994-95 having fulfilled the prescribed eligibility criteria to one of the 15 seats reserved for admission to Pondicherry general category candidates. The admission to the M. B. B. S. course in JIPMER is made on the basis of marks secured by the candidates in the entrance examination conducted by the Institute strictly on merit. According to the prospectus, for admission to the M. B. B. S. course for the academic year 1994-95, issued by the respondents 1 and 2, the applicant should be an Indian national, except for those admitted against the seats reserved for foreign students who are nominees of the Government of India and French Nationals of Indian Origin.

(3.) IT is further stated that the respondents 1 and 2 did not receive copy of the report of the enquiry said to have been conducted by the police. Only on 25. 11. 1994 the Joint Secretary to Government, Revenue department, forwarded a copy of the police report for their information. An extract of the police report reads thus: 'there was no evidence to disprove that whether vijayan renewed his Son's passport after 1987. Unless it is disproved on the part of E. Vijayan, it can be presumed that Dileep Vijay Menon was born at Dallas, U. S. A. and obtained a valid passport up to 1987, is a citizen of u. S. A. only and not an Indian Citizen.' Only from the police report, the respondents 1 and 2 came to know that the third respondent is a citizen of U. S. A. and that they were actively considering the matter seeking legal opinion for the purpose of cancelling the admission already given to the third respondent. They received copy of the writ petition at that time. Unless the admission of the third respondent is cancelled, vacancy under the Pondicherry General Category will not be available. Thus the second respondent has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.