AMRITA RAVINDA NAGMOTI Vs. DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims that she belongs to Ladshakhiya Wani caste. She completed her school education from Malegaon and thereafter passed 11th and 12th standards from the College at Pune. She had taken Science stream in her college. After passing the H.S.C. examination, she appeared for MHT-CET-2008 held by the Directorate of Medical Education & Research, Mumbai for admission to the First Year Health Science course for the year 2008-09. Her rank in the merit list was 123.1. She was granted admission at Government Dental College and Hospital at Aurangabad in the Centralized Admission Process. In terms of Rule 2.2.3 of the relevant brochure, according to her, she was entitled to seek preference for a better seat and was entitled to be considered for betterment in subsequent rounds. The State of Maharashtra vide Government Resolution dated 25th June, 2008 declared and included caste Ladshakhiya Wani and others in the Other Backward Classes at Entry No. 343. The petitioner being aware of the said Resolution, claims to have immediately applied on 2nd July 2008 to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Malegaon with supporting documents for getting the caste certificate. The date for submission of preference form was 4th July 2008 to 12th July, 2008 and she having applied for the caste certificate filled upon the preference form on 5th July, 2008 for counseling. As she was informed that he could not claim reservation unless and until she had a caste certificate, thus without claiming the benefit of caste which was declared as Other Backward Class, she filled up her preference form. Her caste certificate was accepted for scrutiny by the Committee on 25th August, 2008 as indicated in Exhibit "D" to the petition. She received the caste certificate and where after in accordance with the rules she submitted the same before the Scrutiny Committee for its scrutiny on 12th August 2008. Her request was initially rejected on the ground that the caste certificate was required to be submitted on 19th July, 2008 in terms of Government Resolution dated 2nd June, 2008. However, her validity certificate has not been issued as yet and petitioner has also prayed in this writ petition that respondent No. 3 be directed to scrutinize the validity of the caste certificate and, if found entitled, issue caste validity certificate. Rule 9 of the information brochure required that the candidate should claim the constitutional reservation in the original application form, what she could not do for reasons beyond her control when she subsequently claimed the seat on the basis of the said Resolution and the third round of counseling was to take place on 15th September, 2008 as per schedule and having failed to secure her request before the respondents for allotment of a seat in the Dental College, she has approached the Court. She claims to have approached respondent No. 1 on 29th August, 2008 where she was told that her request could not be acceded too. However, there is no order on record.

(2.) Keeping in view the urgency in the matter, vide order dated 10th September, 2008, notice was issued returnable on 12th September 2008 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents did not place on record any reply because of shortage of time, but argued the matter. It was pointed out that the petitioner has not stated correct facts in the petition. It is not in dispute that her rank was 1231 and she was first given a seat in Occupational Therapy in order of merit and her preference. This was allotted to her in the initial counseling itself. This seat she gave up, got her fee refunded and then in another set of counseling was given a seat in Physiotherapy course and the said course has already commenced, she has been attending the course and is presently a student of that course. Further, according to the respondents, she was and is not eligible for benefit of the reservation for the current academic year 2008-09 as she was not eligible to claim that reservation even as on the last date meant for submission of the application. In fact, on her own showing, she has not even received her caste validity certificate upto now and so there is no question for allowing her to shift or alter her preference of subject at this juncture when the course has already begun.

(3.) Admission to these courses is granted by a competitive entrance examination. The Government of Maharashtra had duly notified information brochure containing preference system for admission to Health Science courses. The said brochure contained the application form as well. It is a settled principle of law that a notified brochure particularly in exercise of statutory power of the State and its constitutional obligation is binding on all concerned. In other words, the terms and conditions of the brochure for admission to a course apply with equal force to the applicant, management of colleges and the Government itself. This is a view expressed by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Mahatma Gandhi Missions Institute Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2008 (5) Bom.C.R. (F.B.) 545.