DEEBA HABIB Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER appeared in common entrance test 2000 held by Competent Authority Entrance Examination, Government of Jammu and Kashmir in July, 2000. In the result notification petitioner is shown to have secured 154 marks in aggregate (with break up: - Physics 54, Chemistry 55, Biology 45 marks): Petitioner was selected on her merit against on of the payment seats, as submitted by her counsel. Petitioner on rechecking of answer sheet alleges of having discovered that one question each in Chemistry and Biology, with correct answers have been left out and not evaluated. In terms of Rule 15 of Information Brochure for the two correct answer petitioner would have got two marks (1 mark for each correct answer) and thereby, she would have secured 156 marks in stead of 154 marks awarded to her. With 156 aggregate marks, being a female candidate, she would have earns seat in MBBS in any of the Government Medical Colleges of the Jammu & Kashmir State, in as much as female candidates having earned 155 marks have been selected to undergo the MBBS Professional Course in the Government Medical Colleges, Srinagar. The petitioner prays that the respondents/ competent authority be issued mandamus to grant / admit petitioner to a Government Medical College for undergoing MBBS Professional Course in Open Merit Category (OMC) of females.

(2.) RESPONDENTS No. 2,3 and 4 of the Competent Authority Entrance Examination have filed reply an affidavit of its Registrar -Respondent No.4 Respondent No .6 has also filed reply. Respondent No 6 has withdrawn from raised controversy, in as much as, it has pleaded, rightly as conceded by counsel on either side that the selection and allotment of candidates to Professional Colleges is a matter for the Jammu & Kashmir Competent Authority Entrance Examination and not for the SKIMS. It is not in any manner involved in the process of selection to MBBS course. The contesting respondents 2 to 4 have in reply pleaded that the petitioner marked two answers of question No. 25 as also of question No.62 in chemistry paper. She did same thing in respect of question No. 16 in Biology paper. After marking two answers in respect of each of these questions, she has tried to erase one answer and has damaged the answer sheet. The computer scanner has not evaluated these questions accordingly. On the top of the answer sheet in the instruction column, it is specifically prescribed that "Question once marked, no change is possible. Darken the circle if you have made up your mind". The very same instruction is also unequivocally mentioned in Information Brochure under Sub -clauses 4 and 5 of clause 15. Due to the cutting and erasure as prescribed, the answers are to be treated as incorrect and no credit is to be given for the answers. It is in this manner that the petitioner has been correctly evaluated and has secured 154 marks. No answer correctly attempted by the petitioner has been left out unassessed. It is also stated that no Medical Colleges of the State can accommodate even a single candidate, as they are at saturation level after colleges are been allotted seats as per their statutorily prescribed intake capacities There being no seat available in any of the Medical or Dental Colleges, petitioner at this stage, cannot be given admission against a non -payment seat in any of the colleges Besides, the petitioner has failed to make a selection grade in Government Medical College of State on merits. The Writ petition is prayed to be dismissed.

(3.) THE record have been produced under directions by Mr. J.A. Kawoosa, Mr. Kawoosa cites Admission Committee CM 1995 and anr Vs. Anand Kumar and anr (1998) Supreme court Cases 333, for his submission that the version given by the Competent Authority Entrance Examination Government of Jammu & Kashmir as against the version of petitioner should be accepted by the court and in that context record need not be examined by the court. Mr. Kawoosa goes on further to submit that in case court deems it proper to examine the record, the same may be examined to put at rest, the whole controversy raised by petitioner of she not having been evaluated properly/correctly in the matter of assessment of marks.