ABHISHEK DADARWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the illegal action of respondents, depriving him thereby of admission to the Government Autonomous Dhanvantri Ayurveda College, Ujjain under unreserved category, despite his merits.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated relevant facts are that the petitioner belongs to reserved category of Other Backward Classes (hereinafter referred to as the OBC). Vyavsayik Pariksha Mandal (hereinafter referred to as the VYAPAM) issued an advertisement in the newspaper of Madhya Pradesh Ayurvedic, Homeopathic and Unani Test, 2010. Petitioner duly submitted his application form which was accepted and admit card was issued to him on 2.7.2010 with Roll No.604262, as revealed in Annexure P-2. In the examination (written test), he was awarded 62 out of 150 marks and was kept at Merit No.314 of Reserved Category in Government Autonomous Colleges. He was also placed at consolidated Merit No.888 in private colleges, which is revealed in Annexure P-3. Counseling programme of first phase for admission to the first year course of BAMS/BHMS/BUMS for the academic year 2010-11 was advertised. Copy of the said counselling programme is Annexure P-5. Petitioner did not appear in the first counseling. He appeared in the second counseling, which commenced from 19.10.2010. He was granted admission in Pandit Shivshaktilal Sharma College, Ratlam, which was not availed by him, due to financial crisis. Third counseling commenced from 28.10.2010, which was advertised vide Annexure P-6. Petitioner prepared a demand draft of Rs.500/- drawn on STate Bank of India Service Branch, Bhopal on 27.10.2010, to appear in the third counseling. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner, as per clause 9.14 of the Madhya Pradesh Ayurvedic, Unani and Homeopathy under Graduate Entrance Examination Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the Examination Rules, 2010, for brevity), has an option to select seat during the counseling either from reserved category or unreserved category. Copy of Examination Rules, 2010 is placed on record as Annexure P-8. It is further stated in paragraph 5.8 that the petitioner, at the time of reporting in the third counselling process, submitted to the Principal of Pandit Khushilal Ayurvedic College, Bhopal that he was willing to appear in the counseling of general candidates along with counselling for OBC candidates. He was informed that his name would be automatically sent for the counselling for general candidates and no separate application is required. It is stated in specific that the petitioner was ready with separate demand draft for appearing in the counseling of OBC as well as general candidtes. Respondents did not call the petitioner for counseling of general candidates, despite his eligibility and entitlement. Petitioner, later on, came to know that students, having lesser marks in comparison with the petitioner, were given admission in Government Dhanvantri Ayurvedic College, Ujjain. He submitted a representation on 9.11.2010, which was not responded. Thus, according to the petitioner, the respondents/authorities have acted in contravention of the Examination Rules, 2010 and have deprived the petitioner of admission in the said Government College. They have also granted admission to less meritorious students having lesser marks. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction, ordering thereby the respondents to give admission to the petitioner, according to his eligibility and entitlement under the Examination Rules, 2010.

(3.) UNDISPUTEDLY, the petitioner belongs to OBC category and is governed by the M.P. Ayurvedic Unani and Homeopathy under Graduate Entrance Examination Rules, 2010 (i.e. Examination Rules, 2010). He appeared in the entrance examination held in the year 2010 and secured 62 marks out of 150. He was placed at Merit No.314 in the reserved category and consolidated Merit No.888 in private colleges. It is all revealed in Annexure P-3. It is further an undisputed fact that the petitioner was allotted Pandit Shivshaktilal Sharma College, Ratlam in the second round of counseling, which was not availed by him. Instead, he expressed his desire to opt to appear in the third round of counseling (this is admitted by the respondents in paragraph 2 of the reply).