RITWIK PANDEY Vs. PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging refusal by the authorities to permit the petitioner from appearing in the counselling for admission to the post -graduate medical Course in Madhya Pradesh.

(2.) PETITIONER Ritwik Pandey appeared on 3. 1. 1999 in All India Competitive Entrance Examination for admission to Post Graduate Medical Course conducted by All India Institute of Medical Sciences, This examination is conducted as per directives of the Supreme Court of India for admission to 25% scats of various post graduate Courses in the country. This examination is governed by the Rules and Regulations made by Government of India (hereinafter to be referred to as All India Rules). The petitioner was placed at Serial No. 310 in the merit list of the successful candidates. He appeared in all India counselling at New Delhi on 9.3.1999. He was allotted a scat in the S.S. Medical College, Rewa in Madhya Pradesh in Paediatrics Course. He did not join the course. The petitioner had also appeared in the examination for entrance to post graduate Course as per M.P. Medical and Dental Post -Graduate Entrance Examination Rules, 1999 (hereinafter to be referred to as M.P. Rules). This examination was conducted on 24,1.1999. The result was declared on 11.3.99. The petitioner secured 4th rank in order of merit in the general category. The petitioner was called for counselling on 12.4 .1999 at Bhopal. He was, however, not permitted to appear in the counselling and it was adjourned. The representation made by the petitioner has been rejected by respondent no. 2.

(3.) THE argument of the petitioner is two -fold. Firstly the said Rule would apply to those candidates who were allotted post graduate scats in Madhya Pradesh before year 1999 and secondly, the said Rule is not applicable to him as he was not allotted any post graduare scat for which examination was conducted as per M.P. Rules. In other words, the contention of the petitioner is that he cannot be denied admission against the seats for which the examination was held according to M.P. Rules' and his failure to avail the scat which was allotted to him in the Medical College of Madhya Pradesh as per All India rules does not come in his way to appear in the counselling for admission against the scats available as per M.P. Rules. It is also submitted that the word "Counselling" in the said rule does not cover "all India counselling" and it means the "counselling" as per M.P. rules.