OWAIS MEHMOOD Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Following reliefs are claimed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition:-

(2.) Petitioner claims to be covered under Category-III. He claims to have also applied under Category-I as his father had been killed by the terrorists. An admit Card No. 143937 was issued in favour of petitioner for examination scheduled on 23rd-24th June, 2012. According to averments in the petition, four candidates were to be selected for the categories mentioned in the notification for two seats each in NCCB, Medical College, Jabalpur and Darbhanaga Medical College, Lehariassrai, Bihar. Other conditions mentioned in the notification required:-

(3.) The petitioner claims to have complied with all the requirements. He claims to have obtained 128 marks in the merit. According to petitioner, respondents did not issue the selection list. His uncle Syed Ishtaq Mehmood applied under RTI for seeking information regarding selection of candidates. The information furnished on 15.10.2012 revealed that the petitioner was shown at S. No. 2 under Category-III but candidates figuring at S. Nos. 1 and 3 had been selected. It was further revealed that the benefit against priority-I, II and priority III categories was restricted only to the wards of civilian victims of terrorism and in the event of such benefit having been availed in respect of one ward, 2nd and 3rd was not eligible to be selected against these reserved seats. It is claimed that there is no provision under Terrorism Act which prevents a candidate from getting benefit of the State Quota of M.B.B.S. against the seats reserved for candidates belonging to the State in Central Pool. Petitioner's case is that except three categories and the conditions laid down in Advertisement Notification No. 55-BOPEE dated 07.09.2012, no guidelines of Health and Family Welfare Ministry have been incorporated in the aforesaid notification and in regard to seats of M.B.B.S. reserved for Ministry of Home Affairs, a separate notification No. 42-BOPEE dated 27.07.2012 has been issued inviting applications for nomination/selection in the Central Pool. Petitioner claims that despite being more meritorious, his name has been deleted from the list of selected candidates while he was entitled to be selected under State Quota reserved for J & K State in outside Colleges in terms of Advertisement Notification No. 55-BOPEE dated 07.09.2012. Petitioner also claims that his case is covered under Category-III. Thus, the petitioner bases his claim against the State Quota in Central Pool M.M.B.S. four seats in different Colleges outside the State. Further case of the petitioner is that State Government makes the nomination under State Quota while against the Quota of Home Ministry it is the Home Minister who has to make the nomination. The two categories, according to petitioner, are different. Thus, the petitioner claims to be duly selected on the basis of merit at S. No. 2 under Category-III and assails the inclusion of private respondent No. 5 who is less meritorious.