YASHU SAINI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein Yashu Saini has sought a direction from this Court in this writ petition to the respondents to grant him admission in a Medical College in Rajasthan in the quota of 15% seats which had been reserved for the students of All India Pre-Medical Test (hereinafter shortly referred as "AIPMT"), but remained unfilled due to non-joining of the students, treating them as surrendered seats in favour of the State quota so as to make it available to the students of Rajasthan like the petitioners, who have already sought admission elsewhere in India under the AIPMT quota.

(2.) The undisputed facts of the case are that the scheme for admission was formulated by the Supreme Court for admission into the MBBS Course in the matter of Shravan Kumar v. DGHS reported in (1993) 3 SCC 332 : (AIR 1994 SC 1448) laying down guidelines therein regarding allotment of seats and the cut-off date by which admissions had to be completed. As per this scheme 15% seats by all States in India had to be reserved for the students qualifying for a seat on All India basis and rest of the 85% were to be filled by the students of the particular State, who qualified for such seats. The petitioner appeared in the All India Pre-Medical Examination on 9-5-99 in which the petitioner was placed at rank 1017. He thereafter, appeared for the first counselling for the seats of AIPMT wherein he was allotted Baroda Medical College, where he has been admitted and is prosecuting his studies. Subsequently, when all admissions were completed and closed, he came to know that some seats falling in the quota of AIPMT were left unfilled in the Medical Colleges of the State of Rajasthan which raised his expectation that he could be allotted a seat in any of the Colleges in the Rajasthan State against the quota of AIMPT, since the unfilled seats in the All India quota should be treated as surrendered seats to the Medical College of the State quota in view of the scheme laid down by the Supreme Court referred to hereinbefore. As already stated, this scheme was formulated by the Supreme Court according to which the entire admission process had to be completed by 30th September each year. It appears that some seats in the AIPMT quota remained unfilled in the State of Rajasthan after 30th September by which date the admission process was complete. When the petitioner became aware of this situation, he inferred that those seats could be treated as surrendered seats to the State of Rajasthan so that he could get a fresh chance to seek transfer/admission in a Medical College in Rajasthan which appears to be the reason for filing this writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner's plea therefore, in this writ petition is two fold-firstly that the un-filled seats of the AIPMT quota which could not be filled should be treated as surrendered to the State of Rajasthan and hence should not be allowed to remain vacant and secondly that the limit of filling-up the seats by 30th September, 1999 which was the limit fixed as per the scheme of the Supreme Court laid down in the case of Shravan Kumar (AIR 1994 SC 1448) should have been extended in view of the availability of the aforesaid seats, which should be treated as surrendered.