ANKITA SUBHASH LOTLIKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Like previous years, this year also the admission to professional courses has given rise to one more petition in this Court This time, it is not regarding the holding of Goa Common Entrance Test ("gcet" for short) , but with regard to the weightage to be given to the result of the gcet Only last year in this Court a petition was filed challenging the holding of GCET for admission to professional courses on the ground that announcement for holing the GCET was made belatedly and, therefore, a sort of consent order was obtained from this Court on 28th June, 2004, by way of interim relief restraining the State from holding GCET for the last academic year only, on the ground that adequate notice was not given for holding of the gcet. Accordingly, this year the Government had issued circular in the form of advertisement dated 12th January, 2005, giving the dates for holding of the GCET for admission to various professional courses like M. B. B. S. , B. D. S. , b. E. , B. Arch. , and B. Pharm. , for the academic year 2005-2006. In that circular it was indicated that merit list for admission to the various professional courses would be given by preparing a merit list by giving 75% weightage ,to the marks obtained in the qualifying examination and 25% weightage would be given to the marks obtained in GCET. Thereafter, one more circular dated 17th March, 2005, was issued making a variation in the dates of the test for different subjects. Then the Government issued the impugned circular dated 4th April, 2005. Exh. 'c' to the petition in which it was stated that the Government had no alternative but to assign 100% weightage to the marks scored in the relevant subjects of Goa Common Entrance Test 2005 for preparing the merit list for admission to various professional degrees courses mentioned above. It is the circular which is under challenge in this petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, by a group of 9 students, through their guardians, who have appeared both for the qualifying examination of the Higher Secondary School Certificate as well as for the GCET. The said circular is challenged mainly on the ground that the decision of the government to conduct the Common Entrance Test with 100% weightage at short notice of less than one month was contrary to the earlier notice dated 12th january, 2005, and is, therefore, arbitrary, illegal and bad in law and in contravention of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of (Master Vasudeo @amey Subhashchandra Kamat v. State of Goa and others) , a. I. R. 1997 Bom. 114. There are other grounds also taken in the petition, which were also pressed at the time of the hearing of the petition, namely that the Government's reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of (Mridul Dhar (minor) and another v. Union of India and others) , A. I. R. 2005 S. C. 666, is not correct and, therefore, there was non-application of mind on the part of the Government and in the State of Goa where there is only one Board conducting Higher Secondary School Examinations where almost 98% students appear, there is no necessity for holding GCET giving admission to the professional courses.

(2.) It is not in dispute that so far as this State is concerned, holding of gcet for the purpose of giving admission to professional courses was announced for the first time last year, but the same was held ultimately this year as per the schedule announced in the above circulars. The said tests were held on 30th April, 2005, and 2nd May, 2005. So far as the aptitude test for B. Arch. is concerned, it was held on 9th May, 2005. The present petition was filed on 11th April, 2005. As no interim stay was granted, not only the gcet was held as per the schedule announced by the Government, but the results not only of the GCET but also of the qualifying examinations are already out. The results of the GCET were declared on 1st June, 2005, while that of the 12th Standard were declared on 6th June, 2005. Since the results of the two qualifying examinations as well as the GCET were declared before the hearing commenced in this petition, some students had intervened on either side and, as the decision in this petition was likely to affect one way or the other the intervenors, we had allowed the students to intervene in the petition and gave full hearing to the intervenors as well.

(3.) While issuing the impugned circular of 4th April, 2005, it is stated that in view of the judgments of the Apex Court, the Circulars and Directives issued by Medical Council of India ("mct" for short) , University Grants Commission ("ugc" for short) and All India Council for Technical Education ("aicte" for short) , it had become mandatory for all states to conduct Common Entrance test for admission to professional and technical degree courses and, therefore, the Government of Goa shall hold Common Entrance Test for admission to the First Year Degree Courses in the Medicine, Dentistry, Engineering and Pharmacy in the various colleges of Goa. It was further stated in the said circular that subsequent to the judgment of the Apex Court delivered in the case of Mridul Dinar (supra) on 12th January, 2005, the Government had obtained legal advice and felt that it had no alternative but to assign 100% weightage to the marks scored in the relevant subjects of the GCET 2005, for preparing merit list for admission to the various professional degree courses, like M. B. B. S. , B. D. S. , B. Arch. and B. Pharm. , etc. In reply to the petition, the Government has filed affidavit in which also the stand taken is that as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mridul Dhar (supra) there was a mandate that the merit list should be prepared only on the basis of the marks obtained at the GCET, which is controverted and has been subject of attack on behalf of the petitioners.