RANBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RANBIR Singh, petitioner, was admitted to the M. B. B. S. Course at the Medical college, Amritsar in June/july, 1970, against one of the seats reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidates. He successfully completed the five years course of studies prescribed by the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (hereinafter called the 'university' ). He appeared in the M. B. B. S. final examination in December, 1974 and was declared successful subject to the condition that he was to reappear in two subjects upto April, 1976, i. E. , (i) Medicine etc. and (ii) Ophthalmology and E. N. T. He had already appeared in the above mentioned two subjects, but the University had not declared his result. The Medical Council of India has prescribed 12 months' period of internship for the purposes of registration with it. After the petitioner was declared successful in the M. B. B. S. Examination, he was allowed to join as an internee. He successfully completed the period of internship in June, 1976. He left the hostel premises from June 30, 1976 and ceased to be a student of the said college. He has already been granted a provisional Medical Registration Certificate by the Punjab Medical Council on July 4, 1975. It is alleged in para 9 of the petition that the principal. Medical College, Amritsar, issued a notice dated June 24, 1976 to the petitioner, in which it was stated that the Scheduled Caste Certificate, on the strength of which the petitioner was admitted to the M. B. B. S. Course, had been reported to be false, and, consequently, the petitioner was called upon to show cause why his name be not removed from the college rolls as per provision contained in the college prospectus. A copy of the said notice is Annexure 'p--3' to the writ petition which is in the following terms:-

(2.) MR . Kuldip Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the Principal, Medical College, Amritsar had no authority in law to issue such a notice as petitioner was no longer a student of the Medical College having already qualified for M. B. B. S. Degree by completing his post--examination training, which is called internship. I find merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was admitted to the Medical College, Amritsar, in the year 1970. He has completed the M. B. B. S. Course as also internship training successfully. It is not now open to the Principal or any other authority to say that the petitioner had obtained admission by fraud on the basis of a false certificate. It was incumbent on the authorities to verify the correctness or falsity of the certificate at the time of admission or within a reasonable period of 3/4 months. Now after six years, when the petitioner has completed the M. B. B. S. Course and the internship training, it is not desirable that the action be taken against him on the basis of an event which took place in the year 1970. Medical education is very expensive; thousands of rupees are spent on the training of a medical student. It is a matter of common knowledge that there is an acute shortage of doctors in our country. Moreover, even if action is taken against the petitioner at this stage, it would not benefit any Schedule Caste student. No doubt the petitioner has indulged in a practice which is highly undesirable but, as observed earlier, this fact could be verified by the Principal at the time of admission or within a period of 3/4 months thereafter. Had it been done at the time of admission, a Scheduled Caste candidate would have been benefited, because at the initial stage action could be taken against the petitioner and in his place, a Scheduled Caste candidate could get admission. The Principal and the other authorities are themselves to be blamed for this state of affairs. Petitioner on producing a false Scheduled Caste Certificate got admission in the M. B. B. S. Course, and, completed successfully and also underwent the internship training. If the verification had been done at the time of admission or soon thereafter, such consequences would not follow. The fact of getting admission in the Medical College on the basis of a false certificate was discovered by the authorities only in the year 1976. If the action is taken now against the petitioner, the society would be deprived of one qualified doctor when there is dearth of doctors in India. No doubt the petitioner has committed a serious mistake, but as He had already completed the M. B. B. S. Course and internship training, it would be harsh to condemn him for ever--who knows if he is denied the chance of becoming a doctor, he may turn into a desperate character. The view which I am taking also finds support from a decision of the Supreme Court in Shri Krishan v. Kurukshetra University (1976) 1 SCC 311: (AIR 1976 SC 376) in which it was observed by their Lordships as under:- "the University Ordinances empowers the authorities to withdraw the certificate regarding attendance before the examination if the candidate fails to reach the prescribed minimum. But this could be done only before the examination. Once the appellant was allowed to take the examination, rightly or wrongly, then the statute which empowers the university to withdraw the candidature of the applicant has worked itself out and the applicant cannot be refused admission subsequently for any infirmity which should have been looked into before giving the applicant permission to appear. Here though notice regarding shortage of attendance was twice put up on the notice board and the appellant was aware of it, it cannot be said that he committed a fraud by not drawing the attention of the university authorities to this fact. If neither the Head of the Department nor the university authorities took care to scrutinize the admission form, then the question of the appellant committing a fraud did not arise. Where a person on whom fraud is committed is in a position to discover the truth by due diligence, fraud is not proved. Hence if the university authorities acquiesced in the infirmities which the admission form contained and allowed the appellant to appear in the examination, then by force of the university statute the university had no power to withdraw the candidature of the appellant. "

(3.) THE Punjab Government has recently issued a 'brochure on Admission to First Year M. B. B. S. Class, 1977 for Government Medical Colleges, Amritsar and patiala'. Clause 14 of the Brochure is in the following terms:-" The Punjab Government may also direct the Principal to remove such a student from the college rolls, if on verification received by it before a candidate has passed his first professional Examination, it is satisfied that he/she has obtained admission to the college on the basis of a statement or certificate, which is false. " The plain reading of this clause shows that the Punjab Government can now direct the Principal of the Medical College to remove any student from the college rolls, if on verification received by it before a candidate has passed his first Professional Examination, it is satisfied that he/she has obtained admission to the College on the basis of a statement or certificate, which is false. This provision in the brochure was made only to avoid hardship and from this it is also clear that a student can be removed from the college rolls if the falsity of the certificate is discovered before the completion of the First Professional Examination. This also implies that no action can be taken after a student has passed his First Professional Examination even if he got admission on the strength of a false certificate.