ORISSA MEDICAL SCIENCE Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this batch of writ petitions, the Orissa Medical Science Association and four other individual in service doctors call in question the modified prospectus, 2002 for admission to the Post Graduate Medical Course in the Government Medical Colleges of the State and have sought for a direction to the State Government and the P.G. Medical Selection Committee to make selection of in service candidates on the basis of marks awarded in their M.B.B.S. Examination 55% of marks or above and are continuing in Government services are eligible for being admitted to the course.

(2.) THE petitioners case in brief is that, the State Government, because of dearth of doctors for employment in rural areas and in the KBK districts, represented and assured the Medical Graduates, that in the event they accept Government employment, they would be permitted to join P. G. course on the basis of marks obtained in their M.B.B.S. examination for such admission. The petitioner claims that such assurance was given pursuant to the criteria fixed by the Medical Council of India (Opp. Party No. 2) in its Post Graduate Medical Education Regulation, 2000. The members of the petitioner's association acting on good faith applied for admission to the P. G. Course but suddenly in the month of August, 2002 a modified prospectus, for P. G. Medical selection was published, superceding their earlier prospectus wherein Clauses 9.1 to 9.1.5 and 9.15 was substituted by Clauses 9.1 to 9.4 prescribing the method of selection of candidates, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure 2. According to the petitioner, the State Government keeping in view the assurance, formulated a guidelines by its resolution dated 31st August, 2001 giving relaxation to the in service candidates in adopting a separate procedure for selection stipulating therein that the admissions for such in service candidates shall be on the basis of the marks obtained by them in First, Second and Third M.B.B.S. examination. A copy of the resolution is annexed as Annexure 3 to the writ petition. The petitioner claims such decision of the Government was keeping in view the guidelines of the M.C.I, with the object of achieving desired result of permitting the in service candidates qualified themselves with the P. G. qualification and is not liable to the interfered with.

(3.) SRI Bijan Ray, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the executive power of the State government under Article 162 of the Constitution was exercised by the State Government in enforcing the Regulation of M.C.I. framed under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and as such, the executive power being rational to the nexus and the object of achieving the desired result of permitting in service candidates to qualify themselves with Post Graduate qualification is not available to be whittled down due to dearth of doctors in the State to function in the rural areas, the Government agreeing with the petitioner's Association issued the prospectus that such in service candidates are to be selected on the basis of their academic career, and that such resolution is in consonance with the Regulations of the Medical Council of India. It is further submitted that the modified prospectus works out great prejudice and injustice and is, therefore, liable to be struck down. The learned Senior Advocate contends that the impugned prospectus is otherwise illegal and hit by doctrine of promissory estoppels, curtailing the right already accrued in favour of the petitioner. Confronted with the judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. Dillip Kumar Das and Ors. v. State of Orissa and Ors. reported in 2002 (II) OLR 25, the learned counsel submits that the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court is a decision per incurium having not taken into consideration, the decision of the Apex Court in Pre P. G. Medical Sangharash Committee v. Dr. Bajrang Sani and Anr., AIR 2001 Supreme Court 2473 and on misinterpretation of the decision relied on.