Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1991 DIGILAW 725 (RAJ)

Ganga Vishnu Diwakar v. State of Rajasthan(54)

1991-09-19

NAVIN CHANDRA SHARMA

body1991
SHARMA, J.—This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issue of a direction to the respondents, to allow the petitioner, to change the speciality of Tuberculosis & Chesti-Diseases (TB & CD), allotted to him in MD-Course, to General Medicine, or to any other speciality which has the recognition of the Medical Council of India, in accordance with the preference given by him in his application form for PG-Course. 2. The petitioner passed his MBBS Examination in the year 1988, and he completed his internship in the year 1989. On the recommendation of the Central PG Admission Board, constituted under Ordinance 278-E of the University of Rajasthan, the petitioner was allotted the speciality of TB & CD, in the MD- Course. The petitioner joined the MD-Course in the speciality of TB & CD, in the RNT Medical College, Udaipur, on 17th Jan., 91 as First Year Resident under the Three Year Residency Programme, and since then he has been continuing in the said speciality. The petitioner has stated that in his application form for PG-Course, he had shown his preferences in the following order :— (i) Ortho-paediatrics. (ii) Paediatrics (iii) General Medicine. (iv) Skin & Veneral Diseases. (v) Tuberculosis & Chest Diseases The petitioner was not informed that the PG-Degree in the speciality of TB & CD, from RNT Medical College, Udaipur, had no recognition by the Medical Council of India; and the petitioner had also no knowledge about it. It is alleged that the admission of the petitioner to the MD Degree Course in TB & CD, in RNT Medical College, Udaipur, which is not recognized for the purpose of conferment of degree in the said speciality, would not be useful to the petitioner in his service and educational career. On this basis, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking the above mentioned directions against the respondents. 3. This writ petition was admitted on 9.07.1991. On that date, Mr. MK Kaushik, Deputy Government Advocate, was present, and time was granted to him, to file reply to the writ petition within three weeks; and the writ petition was ordered to be listed on 29th Aug., 91. No reply to the writ petition till that date was filed by the respondents. Arguments were, therefore, heard on the writ petition, and the case was kept reserved for orders. No reply to the writ petition till that date was filed by the respondents. Arguments were, therefore, heard on the writ petition, and the case was kept reserved for orders. However, on 9th Sept., 91, a reply to the writ petition was presented in the registry, on behalf of the respondents. The writ petition was, on oral request made on behalf of the respondents, listed for orders. The reply presented by the respondents was allowed to be taken on record. Further arguments were also heard. 4. The respondents have stated that in his subject preferences, the petitioner had given the speciality of Tuberculosis and Chest Disease as his last preference. This speciality even could not be given to the petitioner in the first instance, and it could be given to him only after the second reshuffling for MD and MS Course, 1990. The petitioner had done his MBBS Course from RNT Medical College, Udaipur, and had also done his internship from Udaipur. The petitioner has studied at Udaipur for a long period, and he must have been well acquainted with the fact that the degree in TB & CD is not recognized by the Medical Council of India. The petitioner has filed the writ petition merely to get admission to the subject of Medicine for which he was not eligible directly through the competitive examination. It is stated that if this Court gives direction to the respondents to give admission to the petitioner, to the subject of his choice, i.e., "General Medicine", other meritorious candidates would be affected, as there were a number of writ petitions pending before the Court, in which, admissions to PG Course in various specialities are in question. The petitioner, having knowledge of the fact that the MD Course in TB & CD is not recognized by the Medical Council of India, took the admission to that subject. Lastly, it is stated that if this Court in the facts and circumstances of the case, gives direction to the respondents to give admission to the petitioner to a subject which is recognized by the Medical Council of India, then, direction may be given for admission to the petitioner in the order of preference, which has been specified by the petitioner in para-4 of his writ. 5. There have been several decisions of this Court on the point, which may be noticed. 5. There have been several decisions of this Court on the point, which may be noticed. In S.B. Civil Writ Petitions No. 2097/90 (Dr. RK Agrawal vs. State of Rajasthan & others), decided on 4th Sept., 90, the petitioner in that case, was also admitted to PG-Course in the speciality of TB & CD, on 6th Sept., 89, in the RNT Medical College, Udaipur; and on re-shuffling held on 17th Jan., 90, he joined in the same speciality, in the SMS Medical College, Jaipur. The petitioner in that writ petition, came to know that the degree of MD in TB & CD, given by the University of Rajasthan, was not recognized for the purpose of registration, or for further higher studies in the speciality, by the Medical Council of India. A learned Single Judge of this court, relied upon an earlier decision of this Court in the case of Dr. Rakesh Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan & Others (DB Civil Writ Petition No. 969/89), decided on 24th Apr., 89, and held that if the petitioner qualified the degree of MD in TB & CD speciality from the University of Rajasthan, he would not be allowed to practise in the said speciality, because, the same was not recognised by the Medical Council of India. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed, and the Principal & Controller, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, was directed to give admission to the petitioner, to MD Course in the speciality of General Medicine. 6. Reference may also be made to another decision of the same learned Single Judge of this Court in Dr. Brijlal Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan & another etc. etc. (SB Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4995, 5498 & 6027 of 1990), decided on 12th Mar.,91. In that case, the petitioners, on inquiry from the Medical Council of India and from the Rajasthan Medical Council, had come to know that the degree in MD, in TB & CD speciality, was not recognised for the purpose of registration for practice in the same speciality. The learned Single Judge held that none of the petitioners would be able to practise in the speciality of TB & CD after they get through the required examination from the University of Rajasthan, since the degree of the University of Rajasthan, in the said speciality was not recognised by the Medical Council of India. The learned Single Judge held that none of the petitioners would be able to practise in the speciality of TB & CD after they get through the required examination from the University of Rajasthan, since the degree of the University of Rajasthan, in the said speciality was not recognised by the Medical Council of India. It was emphasized that it was only desirable that no admission should be given the such course/speciality, which were not recognised by the Medical Council of India. The writ petition was allowed; and the respondents were directed to give admission to each of the petitioners, to any of the specialities with respect to which they had given preferences in their applications, in any Medical College in Rajasthan. 7. It is clear from the above referred decisions of this Court that the degree in MD, in the speciality of TB &CD, conferred by the University of Rajasthan, is not recognised by the Medical Council of India; and in the absence of that, the petitioner would not be entitled to start practice in the said speciality. It has been, time and again, emphasized by this Court that in PG- Courses, seats in such specialities should not be allotted in any Medical Colleges in Rajasthan, the passing of examination from which college and obtaining degree in consequences whereof is not recognised by the Medical Council of India. The respondents have not shown that passing of the MD Examination in the speciality of TB & CD from the RNT Medical College, Udaipur (affiliated to the University of Rajasthan), and conferment of degree in the said speciality by the University of Rajasthan, to such a student, is recognised by the Medical Council of India. It is, however, clear that admission to PG-Course, according to Ordinance 278-E of the University of Rajasthan, is made on the basis of merit-cum-preferences. from the present writ petition, it is not at all clear as to whether the petitioner on the basis of his merit-cum-preference, amongst the various candidates, who had passed the Pre-PG Test, was entitled to be admitted to other higher preferences given by him in his application form for admission to PG Course. This Court cannot, therefore, straightway direct the respondents to admit the petitioner to the speciality of General Medicine. This Court cannot, therefore, straightway direct the respondents to admit the petitioner to the speciality of General Medicine. All that can be directed is that in case the petitioner, on the basis of merit-cum-preferences, is entitled to be admitted to PG-Course in the specialities of Ortho-paediatrics, Paediatrics, General Medicine, or in Skin & Veneral Diseases, the respondents would consider his case, for change to a higher speciality, solely on the basis of merit-cum-preference. 8. I, therefore, direct the respondents that the petitioners case be considered by the respondents, for his admission to PG-Course , in specialities other than TB & CD, solely on the basis of merit-cum-preference, as was given by him in his application form for admission to PG-Course, and if it is found by the respondents that the petitioner was entitled to admission, on the basis of merit-cum-preference, to any of the first four specialities mentioned in para 4 of the writ petition, he be allowed to change his speciality on that basis, and be given admission accordingly. 9. In the above terms, the writ petition is hereby disposed of.