HEMANTA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is preferred praying for a direction to the Respondent Gauhati University to allow the petitioners to attend classes in the 2nd year MBBS Course so as to fulfil the requisites as contemplated u/Rr. 2 of the Regulation of MBBS Examinations under Gauhati University and also declare the Regulation 2(b) of the Regulation, as ultra vires of the Constitution.

(2.) All the petitioners appeared in the first MBBS Examination held in July, 1998, result of which was declared on 2nd September, 1998. All the 63 writ petitioners in this writ petition are failed students, total unsuccessful students being 69 out of total 150 students. Referring Regulation 12(3) of Chapter V of the Regulation on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 it is contended that it is stipulated therein that there shall be one examination in a year and a supplementary to be held not later than six months after the publication of its results. That this guideline of Medical Council of India (MCI) is followed in the Regulation of MBBS Examination framed by the Gauhati University under Regulation 4(2) which provides for supplementary examination to be held after six months of the final examination and that all the petitioners are going to appear in the supplementary examination which was to be held in the December, 1998. Further contention of the petitioners is that Regulation 3(4) of the said Regulation of the Gauhati University provided similar benefit, provided the Principal of the College certifies that the student has prosecuted studies in the college for at least 3/4th of the course allotted for the semester immediately preceding the examination in which the students want to appear. Petitioners' grievance is that the student of the same batch who passed the 1st MBBS course to have qualification are now prosecuting studies in the next course and apparently they will be able to benefit the criteria as required under Regulation 3(4), being able to complete 3/4th of the '2nd year' course (next course) and that consequently as the petitioners will not be allowed to attend the classes along with main batch, will be deprived of the benefit. Further grievances of the petitioners are that while Regulation 3(4) extends the benefit, the same is constrained by under Regulation 2(b) which is reproduced below :-"2(b) the first 1/1/2 years shall be occupied in the study of the pre-clinical subjects and that no students shall be permitted to study the para-clinical and clinical group of subjects until he/she has passed all pre-clinical subjects."Petitioners' grievance is that under the provisions of this Regulation 2(b), the petitioners are being prevented from prosecuting studies in the '2nd year' MBBS Course because they are yet to pass in all the preclinical subjects. Claiming the entitlement to prosecute studies in the '2nd year' MBBS Course (2nd MBBS) petitioners contend that all the petitioners completed the regular course of the 1st MBBS Course and by barring them under the provisions of Regulation 2(b), the petitioners made to have 'waste' valuable time as they are not allowed to attend classes of 2nd part of MBBS examination. That, it is contended having completed the regular course of studies in the 1st MBBS Course and having completed the same within the meaning of Regulation 4(4)(3) of the Regulation they cannot be insisted to attend classes of a course which they have already completed, that they be allowed to attend classes for the 2nd MBBS Course along with the main batch until the supplementary examination is over and results declared which will enable the petitioners to go along with the main batch.

(3.) The Registrar-Respondent No. 2 filed affidavit-in-opposition and Respondent No. 4 Dr. Pulin Kr. Deka, Principal G.M.C. filed application on behalf of himself and Respondents 1 and 3.