ASHA KUMARI GIRI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsellor the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to allow her to take admission in M.B.B.S. course in Anugrah Narayan Memorial Medical College, Gaya.

(3.) A counter affidavit and a supplementary counter affidavit have been filed on behalf of respondent no.2, the Examination Board. In the counter affidavit it is stated that reshuffling/second counselling was done by advertisement dated 23.8.2006 in compliance of the order of this Court dated 9.8.2006 passed in CWJC No. 8814/2006 to redistribute the seats to disabled candidates against disabled quota seats and thus, it was directed that disabled quota candidates already admitted during first counselling can appear in the counselling to take advantage of seat allotment in MBBS course distributed institutions -wise for disabled candidates. It is stated that total 9 seats were available for all disabled quota for MBBS course in the Government Medical Colleges, out of which 5 seats were available for disabled quota candidates of general category and 4 seats were earmarked to be distributed among DQ candidates of reserved categories. So far as the disabled quota (General) category candidates are concerned, five seats were allotted and the candidates having merit SI. Nos. DQ -Gen -1, DQ Gen -2, DQ Gen -3, DQ Gen -5, and DQ Gen -6 were selected and offered the courses. The candidate at SI. No. DQ Gen -4 was absent during the counselling. However, due to inadvertent error the petitioner who was at merit SI. No. DQ Gen -10 was also issued admission order in MBBS Course in Anugrah Narayan Memorial Medical College, Gaya since DQ Gen -7, DQ Gen -8 and DQ Gen -9 were absent during the counselling. With respect to the reserved category of disabled candidates one seat was allotted to DQ SC -2, two seats were allotted to DQ EBC -2 and DQ EBC -4 and one seat to DQ BC -9. The said posts were filled up by the candidates of the respective categories having highest merit position in the respective reserved categories after those who had been able to secure a seat in the DQ (General) category on the basis of their overall performance in the combined merit list. Such details are clearly given in Annexure -A of the supplementary counter affidavit from which it is evident that the allotment have been made keeping in view the general merit serial position of DQ candidates and reserved category merit position of the DQ candidates. It is evident from the same that the petitioner was a DQ General category at SI. No. 10 in the merit list and she could not have been allotted the seat among five seats reserved for DQ general candidates and thus the allotment made to her earlier must have been on account of inadvertent error of the authority concerned and the. same has rightly been cancelled later on.