CHANDAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitions have been filed by the petitioners for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting -aside the action of the respondent -authorities in not admitting the petitioners in first MBBS course in Dr. Rajinder Parshad Government Medical College, Tanda in District Kangra and to direct them to give admission in the College.

(2.) To appreciate the controversy raised in the present petitions, few facts in the first matter, i.e. CWP No. 289 of 2001 may now be stated. According to the petitioner, he appeared for the Common Entrance Test for admission to MBBS Course for the year 1999 -2000. The petitioner secured 234 marks out of 300 marks in the Common Entrance Test. He could not get admission in Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla in order of merit. According to him, however, he was sure to get admission in Dr. Rajinder Parshad Government Medical College, Tanda. But no admission was given to him. There was no admission during the year 2000 -2001 also. It was stated by the petitioner that some of the candidates approached this Court by filing a writ petition for getting admissions, but the petition was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by this Court, some of the candidates preferred Special Leave Petition in the Honble Supreme Court. Leave was granted and it was registered as civil appeal No. 6618 of 2000. Finally, by a judgment, dated April 10, 2001, the appeal was disposed of by the Honble Supreme Court. After hearing the parties, certain directions were issued by the Apex Court. Relevant part of the directions read as under: "1. That against 50 available seats in the medical college at Tanda for the session 2000 -2001, admissions be made in the order of merit from the list of the qualified candidates who had appeared in the CPMT held in 1999. The cases of the present appellants (17 in number) shall be considered in accordance with their respective merit position in the CPMT held in 1999.

(3.) According to the petitioner, respondents through newspaper reports informed the student community about the decision of the Supreme Court by giving Roll numbers who had been recommended for admission. Roll number of the petitioner did not find place in the newspaper report. He, therefore, approached the authorities and came to know that he was also entitled to get admission as he was qualified and eligible. But he was not granted admission on the ground that the last date as per the decision of the Supreme Court was April 20, 2001 and since the petitioner failed to get himself admitted within the outer limit of April 20, admission was given to other candidate. Hence, the petition.