ASHISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking mainly the following relief:-

(2.) Mr. Ajay Chandel, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had appeared in the test for taking admission to Post Graduate (MD/MS) course in September 2021 and had qualified the same. As per the Prospectus for admission in Government Medical Colleges of the State issued in December, 2021, 50% of the seats were to be filled up from State Quota. Petitioner was selected against 50% State Quota for PG (MD/MS) seat. Petitioner could not get any seat in the first counselling. Thereafter, petitioner appeared in the second counselling, which was held in February, 2022 and was allocated seat in Indira Gandhi Medical College (IGMC), Shimla under State Quota in MD (Anesthesia). A notice was issued by respondent No.3 on 15/3/2022 directing that the candidates who had occupied a seat in the first or second round of counselling and intend to participate in the Mop Up round of counselling against the vacant/unfilled PG seats, to surrender their allocated seat as per Clause 2.3 of the Prospectus. On 16/3/2022, petitioner surrendered his seat in MD (Anesthesia) as he intended to participate in the Mop Up round. However, vide notice dtd. 19/3/2022, respondents held that the candidates who had been allocated PG seats in previous round of State counselling, were ineligible for participating in further rounds of counselling including Mop Up round in view of the advisory dtd. 16/3/2022. However, the notice dtd. 19/3/2022 was in violation of Clause 2.3 of the Prospectus and was liable to be set aside.

(3.) Mr. Ajay Vaidya, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that in view of the advisory issued on 16/3/2022, petitioner was not entitled to participate in the Mop Up round as he had already been allocated seat in the second counselling.