RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question arising for decision in this writ petition is whether the petitioners are entitled to appear in the First Professional examination of MBBS in spite of the provisions of Ordinance 7(ii) requiring the student to have completed 1-1/2 academic years preceding the examination.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that both the petitioners took the PMT test for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses in the State of Punjab in the year 1992. Both having figured lower in merit got admitted to the Government Dental College, Amritsar and Patiala respectively and started attending classes. The process of finalising the admission relating to MBBS was completed sometimes in August, 1992 and classes of MBBS started almost soon thereafter. It was found that one seat relating to backward area category, to which the petitioner No. 1 belonged, and one open merit seat were available in the MBBS. The Principal of Shri Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot respondent No. 3 wrote to the Punjabi University respondent No. 1 to notify the seats to the next candidate in order of merit. The University approved the admission subject to the petitioners' furnishing an affidavit to the effect that they shall be eligible to appear in the First Professional examination only after having undergone not less than 1-1/2 academic years of teaching in the subjects of Anatomy, Physiology and Bio-chemistry as per the Ordinance of the Punjabi University. Petitioner No. 1 furnished his affidavit Annexure P-3 dated November 27, 1992, and petitioner No. 2 furnished his affidavit Annexure P- 6 dated December 23, 1992. The petitioners were given admission. The First Professional examination was to commence with effect from January 28, 1994. Admittedly, the petitioners had not completed 1-1/2 academic years by that date. They were therefore, not issued roll number. The present writ petition was instituted on January 21, 1994. The Motion Bench by order of the same day, namely, January 21, 1994 directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to take the First Professional MBBS examination started from January 28, 1994, at their own risk and responsibility and subject to decision of the writ petition. The petitioners accordingly appeared in that examination.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that Ordinance 7(ii) is not mandatory but only directory. It has further been pleaded that even if the provision is taken to be mandatory, the University itself has been granting relaxation to various students from time to time. A number of instances have been relied on in this behalf by the petitioners. It has further been stated that the delay in finalising admission to MBBS occurred on the part of the college, for which the petitioners could not be penalised. The petitioners being not at fault, should not be made to suffer. It has also been stated that the syllabus and subjects in the First Professional of MBBS are the same as that prescribed in the first year of BDS. The petitioners had attended the Course in BDS and thus for all practical purposes, they should be deemed to have attended the MBBS Course from the very beginning. They have further claimed that they had attended the required number of lecturers in theory as well as practicals and they were otherwise eligible to appear in the First Professional examination.