ORDER : The petitioners are a handful of students who were stranded in the U.S.S.R., while taking medical education and on return find themselves not offered or provided any rehabilitative help from either the Union of India or the Medical Council of India, or both. It appears that the petitioners are only a sample few of many more who yet stand outside the portals of the Court but might seek entry at a later stage. These students while taking education in USSR came back to India because of the disturbed conditions prevailing in that country. They went from India, neither sponsored by the Union of India nor by the Medical Council of India. Rather they had taken aid of certain private agencies who merely were required to furnish information of their activities to the Govt. of India in sending students to that country. Now when the students are back, they require a mandamus from this Court by means of this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution requiring the Medical Council of India to admit them to various medical colleges in this Country on the basis of and in continuation of their academic achievements in the USSR. The foothold of such claim is sought to be established on the strength of a scheme which the Medical Council of India has framed in order to accommodate those students who were likewise uprooted from the USSR but were sent to that country by the Medical Council of India. It is stated by the petitioners that pursuant to such rehabilitatory measure full seats created for the purpose have not been filled and a lot many seats are lying vacant in which the petitioners at least, if not others, can be adjusted. 2. The Union of India and the Medical Council of India, in support of each other, have taken the stand that they singularly as well as jointly owe a responsibility to rehabilitate only those students who were sent to USSR by the Medical Council of India and the scheme aforementioned has been framed to achieve that purpose. These respondents disown any stutory responsibility to rehabilitate students such as the petitioners who had gone through private agencies. In this situation, helplessness has been expressed on behalf of the Medical Council of India for not adjusting the petitioners. 3. These respondents disown any stutory responsibility to rehabilitate students such as the petitioners who had gone through private agencies. In this situation, helplessness has been expressed on behalf of the Medical Council of India for not adjusting the petitioners. 3. Be that as it may, the overall responsibility of the State cannot be washed off by expression of helplessness. The State owes a responsibility at least to make an effort to discover whether any scheme can be prepared or measure adopted to give succour to these people in some form or the other on the present available resources. We, on our behalf, are unable to suggest anything positive, but we have otherwise no doubt that some measure could be formed and adopted if the said two respondents join their heads together on listening to the students of the kind of the petitioners, and evolve some suitable scheme or a formula. We leave the matter at that expressing the hope that both respondents would seriously move into the matter. We thus do not proceed any further and dismiss the petition in limine, in the present situation. Order accordingly.