JUDGMENT - Tulpule R.D. J.-These three petitions relate to house posts or jobs in housemanship available in the Government Medical Colleges in Nagpur. In the University area of Nagpur, at Nagpur there are two Government Medical Colleges, known as Government Medical College and Indira Gandhi Medical College. The rules for offer and appointment to the post of housemanship are framed by the State Government, which govern appointment and offer of house-jobs to medical graduates. 2. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1804 of 1982 is a medical graduate having passed her examination in October 1982. She was also registered with the Medical Council which is a requirement under the Rules for being eligible to the job of a houseman. She also did a house-job in the subject of General Surgery in the firm term. She wanted to choose and be appointed as a houseman of the second six months' term in the subject of Ophthalmology. She was denied that subject and house-job in that subject on the ground that Ophthalmology is not allied to the subject of General Surgery, which she had chosen for her first house-job, and could not be given a house job in Ophthalmology. She challenges this decision as being not in accordance with the Rules governing such appointments to the house-job. The respondent No. 4 to this petition Dr. Nangiya is also a similar graduate student similarly registered and has done one house-job in the subject of Ophthalmology. It is petitioner's grievance that though respondent No. 4 has less number of marks in the subject concerned and though she had more number of marks than him and is eligible, respondent No. 4 is given the second house-job in Ophthalmology while she was denied the same. 3. In Writ Petition No. 1857 of 1982, the facts are similar except that the first job which is completed by the petitioner was in the subject of Paediatrics and she wanted the second house-job in Gynaecology. The respondent No. 2 to that petition, on the other hand, had completed one house-job being similarly a graduate in Gynaecology and was also given the second house-job in the same subject. In this petition, apart from other similar circumstances, there is an additional circumstance, viz., that both the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have equal number of marks in the subject concerned. 4. In this petition, apart from other similar circumstances, there is an additional circumstance, viz., that both the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have equal number of marks in the subject concerned. 4. The third petition is filed by respondent No. 4 in Writ Petition No. 1804 of 1982. In his case it is also similar with the other. He had been given first house-job in Ophthalmology. For the second house-job he had given a preference in General Surgery, but instead was told that he must do his second house-job in Opthalmology as he was given the first house-job in Opthalmology and was, therefore, denied the second house-job in General Surgery which he wanted. Respondent No. 4 to that petition Dr. Vyawahare seems to be the person who has been given instead of the petitioner, i.e. Nangiya, the house-job in General Surgery. We have heard Dr. Vyawahare also. 5. Notice before admission was issued in Writ Petitions Nos. 1804 of 1982 and 1807 of 1982 to the respondents in those petitions and in particular to the State of Maharashtra, the Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur, as well as the Director of Medical Education and Research, Bombay. We may mention that all these three petitions and the students concerned who have applied for house-jobs relate only to the Government Medical College. Submissions were filed on behalf of the Authorities i.e. the Director of Medical Education, Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur, and the State of Maharashtra. When the matter came up again before us to consider the interim relief's and the orders which were to be passed, as the question was of an urgent and important nature, we thought it advisable to hear the petitioners as well as the respondents fully and pass an order. With that view, we asked the respondents whether they wanted to file any additional submissions to these petitions, in case we decide to dispose of the matter finally and fully since no rule was actually issued. We are informed on behalf of the respondents, viz., the State of Maharashtra the Director of Medical Education and the Dean,. Government Medical College that they do not wish to add anything to the submissions which they have already made. As we pointed out, the other concerned respondents in Writ Petition Nos. We are informed on behalf of the respondents, viz., the State of Maharashtra the Director of Medical Education and the Dean,. Government Medical College that they do not wish to add anything to the submissions which they have already made. As we pointed out, the other concerned respondents in Writ Petition Nos. 1804 of 1982 and 1807 of 1982 are already before us represented by their advocates had also filed their submissions and were heard fully. On the aforesaid assumption so far as Dr. Vyawahare is concerned, we have also heard him to-day. As we pointed out the contention of the petitioners is that in Nagpur University post-graduate registration is not granted unless a student completes two house-jobs and is other-wise eligible in accordance with the requirements laid down in the eligibility Ordinance of the Nagpur University (hereinafter referred as Ordinance No. 57). We may mention at this stage that Ordinance No. 57 has under-gone a change. The present Ordinance which is in force received the assent of the Chancellor in February 1982 and has. come Into force from February 1982. 6. The contention of the petitioners we have referred above and is that in accordance with merit they cannot be denied the second house-job in a subject which they want if they are entitled to it on merit and the interpretation placed by the Dean upon the Rules in that behalf is not correct. It was their contention that since there is no registration for post-graduation for these persons there is no question of giving them, a second house-job in the subject of post-graduation. 7. On behalf of the respondent Dean, it was contended that in accordance with the Rules made by the State Government in the year 1971, governing offer and appointment to house-jobs in Government Medical Colleges, the appointments have been regulated. Their contention seems to be that in case where a particular branch of medicine for the purposes of examination in the Nagpur University is a separate subject, then in those subjects and in the subjects referred to in para 6 of the Rules the second house-job will have to be given and will be given to a student who has been given first house-job in that subject. For those who had not done or have not been given first house-job in those subjects which are mentioned in para 6 of the Rules, or which are not the subjects of separate examination, they can be given a second house-job in an allied subject. Two broad divisions for house-jobs are made, according to the Rules, Medicine and Surgery; and certain branches of Medicine and Surgery are stated as allied subjects. It is further, according to the contention of the respondents, that where a particular branch or subject either in the group of Medicine or Surgery is a separate subject for examination, then it cannot be treated as allied subject. Considerable reliance is, therefore, placed on para 6 of the Rules and it was contended that since Opthalmology and Gynaecology and Obstetrics was a separate subject in the Nagpur University area, so far as Government Medical Colleges are concerned in this area under the Nagpur University, house-jobs in those two subjects are not allied either to Surgery or Medicine, and stand in a different category. It was contended that there are no two categories for classification of Medical Science into Medicine and Surgery, but for the purposes of recruitments to house-jobs in these two colleges there is a third category and that is of subjects which are separate examination subjects in the Nagpur University. The correctness of this interpretation and the Rules placed by the Dean is the subject of these three petitions. As a consequence of interpretation it is possible that there may have to be some re-adjustment and may be, even as the Dean says and pressed before us a general re-arrangement of the house-jobs offered. The total number of house-jobs and total number of students, who have been offered these house-jobs, however, does not change. To us, it is quite clear that this is not a case where any particular student who has already been given house-job will be thrown out of the house-job. What will happen and what will be affect-ed is a subject in which the house-job is at present offered and the subject in which it may be given, on the interpretation, which we are placing, and ultimately offered to the concerned students. 8. What will happen and what will be affect-ed is a subject in which the house-job is at present offered and the subject in which it may be given, on the interpretation, which we are placing, and ultimately offered to the concerned students. 8. Before going to the Rules, we may mention briefly that what is an allied subject, except for what is mentioned in para 9 of the 1971 Rules is not defined in the Rules. That the subjects Gynaecology and Obstetrics, and Ophthalmology are not allied is an interpretation placed by the Dean upon these Rules. We may refer to Ordinance No. 57 which was in force before the present Ordinance, which came into force in February 1982 and was in operation. In a Note appended to rule 4 of that Ordinance, allied Departments are specified as including “all other Departments/subjects excluding the subject in which, the candidate desires to pursue Post-graduate Studies”. 9. A reference was also made to the eligibility rules and qualifications prescribed by the Indian Medical Council for admission to Post-graduate courses as well as what is laid down in rule 4 of Ordinance No. 57 as it was in force before the present Ordinance. It was urged that according to the Medical Council Regulations “candidate has to do one year house-job in the concerned subject or allied subject prior to registration”. In other words, according to the respondents, one year's house-job is necessary in the case of post-graduate registration according to the Medical Council's Regulations. In rule 4 of Ordinance No. 57, relevant portion of sub-rule (b) reads as follows:- “No person shall be eligible for registration unless: (a) …………. (b) (i) he has subsequently done one year's house-job /houseman- ship prior to admission to the P. G. Degree Course. Housemanship shall preferably be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an allied department;” 10. It will be seen from the Regulations of the Indian Medical Council as well as from Ordinance No. 57, rule 4, sub-rule (b) that what is spoken of is a preferable house-job of one year in the same subject. The Indian Medical Council Regulations say “Housemanship should preferably be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an allied department”. The Indian Medical Council Regulations say “Housemanship should preferably be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department and the remaining six months in an allied department”. Rule 4, sub-rule (b) of Ordinance 57 similarly used the words “housemanship shall preferably be for one year in the same subject or at least six months in the same department”. It will be seen, therefore, from this that neither Ordinance No. 57 before it was amended or the Indian Medical Council Regulations require that the house-job of one year's duration to be eligible for registration in post-graduate must be in the same subject. However, it makes it clear that if a student desiring registration had a house-job for whole year in that very subject then he would be preferred to the other who does not have two house-jobs in the same subject. . 11. Amended Ordinance No. 57 of the Nagpur University does away with these words. It merely says, so far as relevant portion is concerned, “housemanship shall be for a period of one year out of which minimum six months shall be in the subject of registration”. Clearly it has done away with the preference in the matter of registration. 12. It is plain that 1971 Rules framed by the State Government are applicable all over the State of Maharashtra. The University Rules for admission to post-graduate students in the respective University areas, how-ever, are not identical. We are informed that in some Universities registration to post-graduate courses is offered along with house-job itself so that where a person obtains a house-job in a certain subject, he would be eligible for registration and is registered for post-graduate studies in that subject. Such is not the situation in the Nagpur University area. 13. We are now mainly concerned with the interpretation placed upon the relevant portion of para 6 and para 9 of the rules by the respondent Dean. Considerable emphasis was placed upon the circumstance that in para 9, subjects allied to Medicine and subjects allied to Surgery are specified. One does not find the subject Obstetrics and Gynaecology as being either allied to Medicine or Surgery. There is, however, a sentence appearing in Surgery group, relating to Ophthalmology, which says ''Ophthalmology where it is not a separate subject for examination” will be treated as an allied subject to Surgery. One does not find the subject Obstetrics and Gynaecology as being either allied to Medicine or Surgery. There is, however, a sentence appearing in Surgery group, relating to Ophthalmology, which says ''Ophthalmology where it is not a separate subject for examination” will be treated as an allied subject to Surgery. We were informed that formerly in the Nagpur University Ophthalmology was not a separate subject of examination, and at the under-graduate level and for the purpose of graduation it was only later that Ophthalmology was introduced as a separate subject for examination. Gynaecology and Obstetrics was, however, a separate subject. The other relevant portion of para 6 which was relied upon is that “No student will be allowed to do housemanship in the concerned subject or subjects continuously for more than 6 months, except in Radiology, Pathology, Ophthalmology, Anaesthesia, Obstetrics and Gynaecology. For the first post, the candidate must do a post in the subject of post-gradnate registration. For the second post, he must do an allied post”. 14. It was urged that where the first post is given to a student, then the subject in which he has been given the first post automatically decided for him his preference and eligibility for registration as a post-graduate student. There can be no gainsaying that these rules have been framed and designed with an eye on the eligibility rules and requirements of the various Universities operating in the field of Medical Education in the State. There-fore, we find, though so far as Nagpur University area is concerned, there cannot be any registration for post-graduate studies, there is reference to registration in these Rules. 15. This portion in para 6 of the Rules has been interpreted to mean that where the first house-job is given to a student in either Radiology, Pathology, Ophthalmology, Anaesthesia, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, second house-job will have to be given to him and shall be given to him in that subject only and in no other subject. For those who have not been given the first house-job in this subject, their choice of selection for first house-job will automatically determine their second house-job in the allied subject. As defined in para 9, they will get their second house-job in the allied subject only. For those who have not been given the first house-job in this subject, their choice of selection for first house-job will automatically determine their second house-job in the allied subject. As defined in para 9, they will get their second house-job in the allied subject only. So far as such students are concerned, they will not be entitled to and will not be given second house-job in the same subject, though others in the other part of para 6, to which we have made a references, they would be so entitled. It is on the basis of this interpretation that the Authority has arranged the admission or offers of appointment to house-jobs. 16. It may be made clear at this stage that house-jobs are offered to students in accordance with their ranking in the merit at the graduate examination corrected as specified in rules which provide for deduction of marks depending upon attempts at the passing of graduation examination. The second criteria is marks obtained by the students in the subject concerned. The third is, these house-jobs arc allotted in accordance with the preferences given by the students concerned. It will thus follow that the students securing highest number of marks would be entitled to have house-jobs in accordance with their first preference and so on, and will proceed as ranking list goes down stopping at the total number of jobs available. It is also clear that for every period of six months, there would be a fresh number of applicants from the fresh graduation examination, which precedes offer of these house-jobs. So, that student who has been offered a house-job for the first term may also at the time of second house-job be required to compete with freshers who may also apply for the house-job for the second term. But, that is a matter which is for the Dean to determine. In a particular half year the list of eligibles will get frozen at the time the applications are invited. We do not think that in the present case that has any consequence at all or is likely to affect the selection already made. 17. We do not think that the interpretation placed by the authorities on para 6 and para 9 of the rules is correct. As we pointed out the expression “allied subject” is not specifically defined. We do not think that in the present case that has any consequence at all or is likely to affect the selection already made. 17. We do not think that the interpretation placed by the authorities on para 6 and para 9 of the rules is correct. As we pointed out the expression “allied subject” is not specifically defined. What is stated in para 9 is as allied to Surgery and Medicine, By process of interpretation and elimination what is not mentioned and what is a separate subject of examination have been treated to be as not allied to either Surgery or Medicine. It was, therefore, contended that if a person has been given first house-job in a subject of Medicine or Surgery, then Obstetrics, Gynaecology or Ophthalmology being separate subjects of examination are not allied and, therefore, the student would not be entitled to do his second house-job in those subjects. Para 6, as we have extracted above, says that the candidate must do first post in the subject of Post-graduate registration and for the second he must do allied post. As a matter of fact, so far as the Nagpur University area is concerned, there is no subject of post-graduate registration as such, and properly speaking, for the concerned houseman. It may at the. most be stated that it is his tentative or preferred subject of post-graduate registration. Post-graduate registration is yet to come and there is nothing to prevent him from changing his choice of post-graduate registration later on if he can successfully do so. 18. For the authorities it was contended that the force of para 6, first part, which we have extracted, requires them to allow the second house-job in the same subject to those students who have been given a house-job in the specified four subjects therein and to none others. Their reason is that there is no subject which is allied to these subjects since the subjects allied to Surgery and Medicine are specified in para 9. Except the subject of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Ophthalmology being a separate subject of examination in this area, it will be seen that Radiology and Anaesthesia not being a separate subject as mentioned, are allied subjects to Surgery in para 9. There are no house-posts in Pathology. 19. Except the subject of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Ophthalmology being a separate subject of examination in this area, it will be seen that Radiology and Anaesthesia not being a separate subject as mentioned, are allied subjects to Surgery in para 9. There are no house-posts in Pathology. 19. We think that the first part of para 6 upon which reliance is placed by the authorities is merely an enabling rule. It does not enjoin upon the authorities to award house-job for the second term to only such students who are offered such job for the first term in the subjects mentioned therein. It does not similarly disentitle persons who are entitled to house-job in those subjects merely because the first house-job was not offered to them in those subjects. It seems to us that the authorities are committing an error in interpreting the Rules in such a manner that there is a water-tight compartment between these subjects apart from Surgery and Medicine which are the two broad divisions of Medical Education, so that there cannot be an inter-change for the purposes of house-job between these and the broad two categories of Surgery and Medicine. We think that the thrust of para 6, first part of the Rules to which we have made a reference, merely enables the Dean to offer second house-job in these subjects to intending graduates who are offered the first post. While in the case of others the rule and para 6 provide that the student shall not be entitled to a second job in the same subject. So far as the four mentioned subjects are concerned in the first part of para 6, the student would be entitled to have a second job in the same subject. That, to our mind, is a correct interpretation of para 6 and para 9, relevant portion. 20. If the rule is so interpreted, we do not see, in the light of eligibility for registration to post-graduate subjects in Medicine, there would be any bar to students getting registration in the subjects of their choice provided they otherwise are eligible in accordance with the requirements of the Ordinance. 20. If the rule is so interpreted, we do not see, in the light of eligibility for registration to post-graduate subjects in Medicine, there would be any bar to students getting registration in the subjects of their choice provided they otherwise are eligible in accordance with the requirements of the Ordinance. The apprehension expressed, that if the rule is interpreted in the manner in which we are interpreting, persons desirous of continuing post-graduate registration and studying in subjects like Ophthalmology or Obstetrics and Gynaecology will not be entitled to do so, we think, is wholly unfounded, either on the basis of the rules or on the relevant Ordinance of the Nagpur University governing post-graduate registration. 21. It is conceded that while offering house-job for the present term, the interpretation which we have placed upon the rule and paras 6 and 9 was not taken into account. Those persons who had been given house-jobs in the subject of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Ophthalmology were required to continue in the same subject for the second term, notwithstanding that in some cases their choice may have been otherwise. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1870 of 1982 and respondent No. 4 in Writ Petition No. 1804 of 1982 had actually given his preference for the second house-job in General Surgery and not for Ophthalmology which he had been given as a. first house-job. On the other hand, in his case he has been pressed with the second house-job in the subject which he did not want as per his preference. While the petitioner in Writ Petition No-1804 of 1982, though wanted Ophthalmology and had given that as first preference, she was denied that subject on the ground that she had not been given the first house-job in Ophthalmology though she had higher ranking. We think, the basis of these decisions is clearly incorrect and not in accordance with the interpretation which we have placed on paras 6 and 9. It follows, therefore, that these petitioners and respondents would be entitled to have their choice and selection re-arranged in accordance with their preferences and in the light of She interpretation of the Rules which we have placed. 22. We wanted to find out and ascertain to what extent the repercussion of this interpretation would be. It follows, therefore, that these petitioners and respondents would be entitled to have their choice and selection re-arranged in accordance with their preferences and in the light of She interpretation of the Rules which we have placed. 22. We wanted to find out and ascertain to what extent the repercussion of this interpretation would be. According to the authorities, the entire scheme of house-jobs will have to be re-arranged in the light of the interpretation. It is not possible for us to assess as to what would be the consequence of the interpretation, though it is plain to us that as a consequence of this interpretation, some disturbance in. the selection, of students for the respective house-jobs will automatically follow. It may be possible, however, and the discretion which the Dean has under the Rules, is not taken away to minimize this dislocation of jobs so as to cause least inconvenience to the students concerned. We make it clear that none of these students who have been given those 65 house-jobs will have to go out of the house-jobs, and will be deemed to be working in the said post to which they will be finally allocated from the date on which the original orders in their behalf were passed. The authorities concerned, therefore, will as expeditiously as possible re-arrange the house-jobs so far as the petitioners and the respondents concerned in these petitions, and what might as a consequence of their dislocation be affected or caused to such other persons from the 65 and allocate to them house-jobs in the subject concerned, and this should be done as expeditiously as possible and within a week. We also make it clear that in granting house-jobs, whatever other criteria and eligibility which are taken into account while awarding those house-jobs will continue to operate and prevail like the number of marks and preferences. We expect that as far as possible the preferences given by the students so far as this term and appointments are concerned will not be disturbed, except as a result of this interpretation. The petitions are allowed and the petitioners as well as the respondents concerned will be governed by the final orders which the authorities may pass in this behalf with regard to the subjects in which they will do the house-jobs. No order as to costs. Rule made absolute. Petitions allowed.