HARISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dr. Harish Kumar, the petitioner, passed his M. B. B. S. Examination in April, 1980. Thereafter he completed one year's internship by April, 1981. Then he did one Year's housemanship in Cardiology at the Institute of Cardiology of the Medical College Kanpur. He applied for admission and registration to postgraduate class of M. D. in General Medicine. The petitioner's grievance is that though he was fully qualified for registration/admission to the M. D. course in General Medicine, the Principal of the Medical College, Kanpur unlawfully rejected the petitioner's application. 2. The Petitioner's submission is that the Principal of the Medical College has taken the view that Medicine does not include Cardiology. Cardiology is a separate branch from Medicine and hence doing housemanship in Cardiology does not qualify a candidate for admission to. the Post-graduate M. D. course, in General Medicine. The petitioner says that this is a wrong view of the criterion laid down by the Medical Council of India. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we are not satisfied that the petitioner has established the tall claim made by him. 4. From a perusal of the counter-affidavit filed by the Medical College as well as from the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the respondents. It is apparent that the allegation in paragraph 9 of the writ petition as to the controversy which is alleged to have been set up by the Principal of the College is entirely different. 5. Both Parties admit that the relevant criteria for selection of candidates for the post-graduate course as prescribed by the Medical Council of India is: " (a) Students for Post-graduate training should be selected strictly on merit judged on the basis of academic record in the under-graduate course. All selection for post-graduate studies should be conducted by the Universities. (b) The candidates should have obtained full registration, i. e. , they must have completed satisfactorily one year of compulsory rotating internship after passing the final M. B. B. S. Examination and must have full registration with State Medical Council. (c) They must subsequently have done one year's housemanship prior to admission to the Post-graduate degree or diploma course. Housemanship should preferably be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an allied department: Provided that in departments like Radiology/anaesthesiology/physical Medicine and Rehabilitation where suitable candidates who have done housemanship in the respective subjects for the respective speciality are not available then the housemanship in Medicine and/or in Surgery may be considered as sufficient. . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 6. We are here concerned with the criteria laid down in clause (c) above. It requires completion of one year's housemanship. It prescribes preferential qualification for housemanship for one year in the same subject. Alternatively, it requires at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in the Allied Department. A question arose as to what is an Allied Department in the context of the criteria laid down in clause (c ). It is not disputed that the Faculty of Medicine of Kanpur University on July 13, 1975, passed a resolution clarifying this. Its resolution stated : "allied Departments mean - (A) General Medicine, Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases, Paediatrics, Pathology, Cardiology, Social Preventive Medicine, Physiology, Pharmacology, Microbiology and Anaesthesiology. " 7. We did not hear learned Counsel for the petitioner whispering any invalidity in the resolution of the Kanpur University clarifying what are Allied Subjects for purposes of criteria laid down in the aforesaid clause (c ). 8. It is further not disputed that in the Medical College of the Kanpur University, M. D. course is available in the following subjects : "general Medicine. Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases, Paediatrics, Pathology, Social Preventive Medicine, Physiology, Pharmacology, Microbiology and Anaesthesiology only. " 9. It will be seen that though ten departments were treated as Allied Departments but yet M. D. Course was offered by the Medical College, Kanpur in nine only of those Allied Departments or subjects. The noticeable feature is that M. D. Course was not available in Cardiology which was treated as one of the Allied Subjects of General Medicine. It is further not disputed that a post-graduate diploma course in Cardiology is available in the Medical College, Kanpur and that the petitioner has also joined it. Thus though a postgraduate diploma course in Cardiology is available but no post-graduate M. D. Course is available in Cardiology, Knowing this the petitioner applied for admission to the M. D. Course in General Medicine saying that properly interpreted the criteria laid down by the Medical Council of India treats Cardiology as equivalent to General Medicine for purposes of housemanship. 10. We must now advert back to clause (c) of the criteria. It requires housemanship for one year in the same subject or, alternatively, at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an Allied Department. For the petitioner it was not submitted that there is no subject or department of General Medicine. He contended that General Medicine is equivalent to Cardiology. The contention is misconceived. This is not a case where we have to find out the significance of the term 'medicine' from general knowledge or from dictionaries. This is a case where the expert bodies like Medical Council and the Faculty of Medicine of the Universities have designated and clarified what are the subjects or the departments and what are the allied subjects for purposes of granting admission to M. D. Course in one or the other subject. General Medicine is one subject for granting admission to M. D. Course. There are nine other subjects in which admission to M. D. Course is available in the Kanpur University. Admission to M. D. Course in each of the aforesaid ten subjects of which General Medicine is only one is done independently of each other. Candidates apply for registration and admission to the M. D. Course in each subject or department separately. They are not interchangeable. 11. In this context, we have to see what is the meaning and significance of the requirement that housemanship should be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an allied department. 12. General Medicine is one subject or department in M. D. Course. Housemanship should preferably be for one year in General Medicine. Alternatively, it must be at least for six months in General Medicine, because that is the same department. The petitioner does not fulfil this condition. He did not do housemanship in General Medicine even for a day. 13. Cardiology has been recognized as an Allied Department of General Medicine. It hence cannot be treated as the same department or the same subject. Else the requirement that housemanship should at least be for 6 months in the same department and the remaining 6 months in an Allied Department would become superfluous or otiose. 14. Admittedly, the petitioner did housemanship of one year in Cardiology only which was nothing more than an allied subject to General Medicine for purposes of clause (c), for criteria for selection of candidates for post-graduate course in medical colleges. He was hence not entitled to admission/registration to the M. D. Course in General Medicine. 15. Learned Counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr. M. C. Gupta's case, 1979 All LJ 251. In that case, the validity of selection and appointment to the post of professor in Medicine in State Government Medical Colleges was challenged. Apart from academic qualifications the post of Professor in Medicine required teaching/research experience for five years. Regulation 4 of the General Regulations provided: "4. 50% of the time spent in recognized research under the Indian Council of Medical Research or a University or a Medical College, after obtaining the requisite post-graduate qualification be counted towards teaching experience in the same or an allied subject provided the 50% of the teaching experience shall be the regular teaching experience. " 16. This regulation thus allowed benefit of 50% research in the same or an allied subject provided that 50% of teaching experience shall be the regular teaching experience. The Supreme Court held that 50% of the teaching experience has to be in the subject concerned, but the balance 50% research time could be in the same or an allied subject. Actually there was no controversy on this aspect. To make it clear, the Supreme Court observed: "to illustrate, if one were to qualify for being appointed as Professor/associate Professor of Cardiology, his teaching experience must be Cardiology though his research experience could as well be in cardiology or allied subject. " 17. The Supreme Court, however, went on to hold that in the context of the provisions of the Regulations, Cardiology was an allied subject of Medicine, i. e. , Medicine includes Cardiology. They made it clear that they say so not because what the dictionary meaning of the expression is but a perusal of the Regulations shows that the expression 'medicine' includes 'cardiology'. 18. Here we are concerned with a situation like Regulation 4 mentioned in that decision. The criteria in our case, just as the crieteria in Regulation 4 aforesaid, makes a distinction between the same subject or department on the one hand an allied subject or department on the other. Cardiology may be an allied subject of Medicine. It may further be said that Medicine includes Cardiology, but that is a far cry from saying that Cardiology is the same subject or the same department for teaching or housemanship as General Medicine. This case hence is of no help to the petitioner. 19. In the result, the petition fails and is dismissed. The interim stay orders granted in this case are discharged. No order as to Costs. Petition dismissed. .