JUDGMENT 1. - Since all the aforementioned writ petitions involve common question of law, therefore, they are being decided by this common order. 2. All the petitioners are M.B.B.S. Doctors and are working as Medical Officer in various hospitals of Government and have been posted in rural/triba/hilly areas. 3. The main controversy in the aforesaid writ petitions are with regard to eligibility for admission in Pre P.G Medical Examination, 2005. In Service category candidates are only eligible, in case, they have completed two years service in rural areas, i.e. desert/hilly and tribal parts of the State. For counting this period, the respondents prescribed the cut off date as 13th February, 2005 and in case, any candidate has completed two years experience of service on or before 13th February, 2005, in that eventuality only in Service candidates are eligible for admission in Pre P.G. Medical Examination, 2005. 4. The petitioners have claimed relief from this Court that all the petitioners be treated eligible for admission in In-Service category by counting the period of two years service upto 30th April, 2005 as has been extended to other general category candidates. It is also prayed that the Instructions of the University of Rajasthan for Pre P.G. Medical Examination, 2005 be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside. Since the examinations have already been held, therefore, the petitioner prayed to declare the result of the petitioners, who appeared in the examination in the category of In- Service and the respondents be directed to allot specialities as per their own merit in the category of In-Service. 5. The petitioner has challenged the instructions of the University and fixing of dates for counselling to adjudge the suitability on the ground that fixing of two different dates for appearing Pre P.G. Medical Examination, 2005 is not only discriminatory, but also arbitrary and violative of provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as the instructions are not having uniform application so far as in-service category. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners referred the instructions issued by the University. The instructions provided that no admission will be made after 31st May, 2005 and as per notification of counselling, course will start from 2nd May, 2005. There is no justification to see or fix cut off date for In- Service candidates on the last date of receiving forms, i.e., 31.1.2005 or 13.2.2005, i.e., date of examination. The instructions provided that no admission will be made after 31st May, 2005 and as per notification of counselling, course will start from 2nd May, 2005. There is no justification to see or fix cut off date for In- Service candidates on the last date of receiving forms, i.e., 31.1.2005 or 13.2.2005, i.e., date of examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the previous years, there was a common cut-off date for In-Service candidates and the practice was deviated in 2005 without any justification by fixing two different dates for In-Service and general category. 7. All India Entrance Examination for M.D/M.S/P.G Diploma and M.D.S course was conducted by All India Institute of Medical Science on 9th January, 2005 and those candidates who completed their training on or before 31st March, 2005 were also eligible by giving likely date of completion of internship. 8. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment rendered in case of State of M.P. v. Gopal D. Tirthani, reported in AIR 2005 SC 2952 wherein it was held that for Pre P.G. there has to be a common entrance test even if there are two separate channels of entry and there can be only one such test for determining eligibility for Post Graduation. 9. In case of G.N. Nayak v. Goa University & Ors., reported in 2002(2) SCC 712 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Court has to consider the intention of the University in laying down the condition of eligibility and court should not proceed on a technical view and legalistic approach. 10. In case of Ashwani Kumar Singh v. U.P.S.C., reported in AIR 2003 SC 2661 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that cut off position is not to be tinkered with unless it is irrational and tainted with malafides. 11. The petitioners have also strongly opposed the submission made on behalf of the University that as per Ordinance 278-E & 278-G, requisite service is required to he completed by In Service doctors and State Government had asked the University to see the experience of the In Service Doctors upto the date of examination, i.e., 13.2.2005. 12. 11. The petitioners have also strongly opposed the submission made on behalf of the University that as per Ordinance 278-E & 278-G, requisite service is required to he completed by In Service doctors and State Government had asked the University to see the experience of the In Service Doctors upto the date of examination, i.e., 13.2.2005. 12. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University has referred the Instructions Booklet for Pre P.G. Medical Examination, 2005 more particularly Clause (i) (b) and submits 360 seats are available for P.G. Classes (M.D., M.S./Diploma Courses). For filling those seats, entrance test has been conducted on 13.2.2005. 360 seats are divided among two categories/classes, 50% seats are kept reserved for All India Competitive Entrance Examination. Out of remaining 50% seats are meant for State quota and for State quota, 180 seats are to be filled up from In Service and general candidates in equal ratio of 90 each in accordance with Ordinance 278-E and 278-G of the University of Rajasthan. Reservation shall be accorded to the general class in accordance with the regulation of M.C.I. And directive of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of M.C.I. v. Madhu Singh, reported in 2002(7) SCC 258 . 13. As per the ratio decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court and Ordinance, it reveals that two years experience is necessary and the cut-off date is given the last date of submission of examination form, i.e., 30.1.2005, but by taking sympathetic view, the University allowed the candidates, who might have completed two years experience of service at least upto 13.2.2005, i.e., date of examination of Pre P.G. Entrance Test. 14. It is further given out by learned counsel for the University that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has fixed the schedule to conduct the examination and to provide the admission in Pre P.G. In any case, Pre P.G. Admission has to be completed before 25th April, 2005. In view of the instructions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the date of counselling is fixed on 15th April, 2005, the last date for joining in the allotted college is 1st May, 2005. 15. In view of the instructions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the date of counselling is fixed on 15th April, 2005, the last date for joining in the allotted college is 1st May, 2005. 15. Just to distinguish the case of the In Service and general candidate learned counsel for the University submits that it is reasonable classification that In-Service Doctors can only get the chance for admission in Pre P.G. after completion of actual two years of experience and two years experience should be completed upto the date of Entrance Examination, i.e., 13.2.2005. Two years experience certificate is required to be given by the Director, Medical and Health, which gives entitlement to the In-Service candidate to appear in Pre P.G. Examination whereas for general category, only MBBS passed candidates are allowed. The MBBS include internship of one year. The internship is a training to which a candidate can get at any place in any attached Medical Hospital of the State of Rajasthan. Hence upto 30.4.2005, the internship will be completed of M.B.B.S candidates. In one batch of M.B.B.S pass out and for open category in the State quota, the one batch is to appear for Pre P.G. Entrance Test. If the experience of service is equated with internship of M.B.B.S than it cannot be a reasonable nexus being the classification is very vide between the In Service and open category. Therefore, the In Service candidates cannot seek parity with open category candidates as the internship is a part of course of studies and is a practical training inclusive of M.B.B.S course whereas experience of service is a different category. 16. The respondents have also challenged the maintainability of the writ petition. All the petitioners appeared in Pre P.G. Entrance Test without any protest, therefore, they are estopped to raise the objections regarding fixing the cut off date to calculate the two years experience by the principle of constructive estoppel. 17. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance on the judgments rendered in the cases of Sunita Agrawal v. State of Haryana, reported in 2000 Vol. 2 SCC 615 , U.O.I. v. N. Chandra Shekharan, reported in 1998 SCC 795, Madan Lal v. State of J & K, reported in 1995 Vol. 3 SCC 486 and Om Prakash Shukla v. Akhilesh Shukla, reported in 1986 SC 1043. 18. 2 SCC 615 , U.O.I. v. N. Chandra Shekharan, reported in 1998 SCC 795, Madan Lal v. State of J & K, reported in 1995 Vol. 3 SCC 486 and Om Prakash Shukla v. Akhilesh Shukla, reported in 1986 SC 1043. 18. In the aforesaid judgments, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that candidates who appeared before the Selection Committee and participated in the Selection Process and after having taken a chance are estopped to challenge the selection process. 19. The Division Bench following the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case of Dr. Deepak Goyal v. University of Rajasthan (DBSAW No. 310/2004) estopped the appellant from challenging the selection process vide its order dated 28.2.2005 as they have participated in the same. 20. The request of the petitioners regarding relaxation cannot be accepted in view of the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Division Bench of this Court in the cases of Director Medical Education v. Dr. Swapnil Chouhan, reported in 2000(10) SCC 585 , MDSU v. Ante Joseph, reported in 1998(6) SCC 348 , Dr. Mirnal Joshi & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, reported in WLC 2002(3) DB 326(Raj.) and University of Rajasthan v. Monika Maheswari (DBSAW No. 709/2004) , Dr. Deepak Goyal v. State & University of Rajasthan, Jodhpur (DBSAW No. 310/2004). 21. By referring the aforesaid judgments, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the candidates who were short of few days of experience, were not allowed to participate in M.D/M.S examination. 22. So far as fixing the cut off date is concerned it is prerogative of the University and the University has rightly fixed the cut off date to calculate the two years experience on or before 15.2.2005, i.e., the date of examination. In support of submission, the respondents placed reliance on the judgments rendered in the cases of Bhupendra Pal Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in 2000(5) SCC 262 , M.K. Murthy v. State of Karnataka, reported in 2003(7) SCC 517, Bhuder v. State of Rajasthan, reported it 2002(2) RLR 370 , Surendra Singh v. State, reported in 1995(1) WLC 197 and Jasbir Ram v. State of Punjab, reported in AIR 2002 SC 60 . 23. 23. Learned counsel for the University further submits that since the petitioner has not completed two years of experience on the date of examination, i.e., 13.2.2005, therefore, they are not eligible to be called for counselling, which is going to be held on 15.4.2005. 24. Heard rival submissions of the respective parties and carefully perused the contents of the writ petition as well as the instructions and Ordinance of the University. 25. As per All India Entrance Examination for admission to post Graduate Medical (M.D/M.S/P.G Diploma) and Dental (M.D.S) courses on open merit, the eligibility criteria is as under : (a) The candidate must be an Indian National. (b) A candidate, who holds M.B.B.S. degree from a recognised medical college (Appendix-III) or a foreign Medical degree included in the Schedules to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and who has obtained full registration either from the Medical Council of India or any of the State Medical Councils after completing compulsory rotating internship shall be eligible to take this examination. (c) The candidates who have obtained their M.B.B.S degree from the Medical Colleges which are not recognised by Medical Council of India shall not be eligible. (d) However, a candidate who, after passing the final qualifying examination (M.B.B.S or the foreign medical degree recognised by M.C.I), is undergoing 12 month compulsory rotating internship/practical training and is likely to complete the same by 31st March, 2005 can take up this examination, but he/she shall not be eligible for admission unless he/she has completed the compulsory rotating internship and obtained full registration on or before 31st March, 2005 or the candidate produces a certificate from the head of institution that he/she will be completing internship by 31st March, 2005. (e) No condonation of Compulsory Rotating Internship shall be accepted unless approved by the Medical Council of India alongwith necessary proof of the approval of the Medical Council of India. The condonation of compulsory rotating internship shall be restricted to the period upto 31st March, 2005 and not beyond that date. (f) Those candidates who are undergoing 12-month Compulsory Rotating Internship and whose Internship is likely to be completed on or before 31st March, 2005, shall have to submit a certificate from the Principal/Dean of the college regarding the likely date of completion of internship in the proforma provided in the Non-Scannable Application Form, failing which their applications will be summarily rejected. (g) The cut-off dates for the recognition of the Medical Colleges and Dental Colleges, for the year 2005 will be 31st October, 2004. The colleges recognised after this date will not be considered. (h) Registration with M.C.I./D.C.I./State Medical Council/State Dental Council is necessary and its documentary proof should be furnished at the time of counselling. (i) Some of the Universities are having regulations that candidates who are already pursuing the PG Course in their University or in another University are not eligible for admission till they complete the course. The candidates who are already pursuing PG Courses either through all India quota or State Quota and are applying for a seat under All India Quota may confirm the eligibility conditions of that University in this regard. DGHS shall not be responsible if such candidates are refused admission. Such candidates may opt for the subject and the college at their own risk and cost. 26. To resolve the present controversy, the Ordinance 278- E(IV) (ii) is relevant, which reads as under : "(ii) For seats reserved for in service candidates as referred at clause (II-c) the candidates must have served the State, i.e., the Government of Rajasthan continuously for more than 5 years after regular appointment under Rajasthan Medical and Health Services Rules, 1963 and should be below the age of 45 years and should have completed at least 3 years of service in the rural area of the State of Rajasthan. Rural area is defined as a rural area where Rural allowance is admissible to the doctors and should have actually served in the rural area." 27. As per the instructions Booklet for the Pre-PG Medical Examination, 2005, the eligibility for admission for In Service Category, the candidates should be In Service of the State Government of Rajasthan and should be below the age of 45 years and should have completed at least Three years of service in Rural areas of the State of Rajasthan or Two years of continuous service of Rural areas of Desert/Hilly or Tribal parts of the State (Rural areas are defined as a rural area where Rural Allowance is admissible to the doctors). 28. The candidates would be required to submit a certificate to above effect duly signed by the Director Medical and Health Services, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, failing which his/her application will not be considered. 29. 28. The candidates would be required to submit a certificate to above effect duly signed by the Director Medical and Health Services, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, failing which his/her application will not be considered. 29. Upon bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions, it reveals that first pre-requisite condition for admission is that the candidate ought to have completed the requisite experience and that is to be verified and certified by the Director, Medical & Health Services, then the application of the In Service category candidate can only be entertained, therefore, for the purpose of counting the two years experience, the University is empowered to fix the cut off date. 30. Now for the Pre P.G Medical Examination, 2005, the University has issued circular/instructions. As per the instruction, the cut off date to count the two years experience was fixed as 13.2.2005, i.e., the date of examination Pre P.G Entrance Test. 31. As the controversy is with regard to two different dates fixed by the University, one for the In Service candidates to count the experience and one for the open candidates, who are undergoing their course in M.B.B.S. 32. Upon perusal of the Ordinance and the judgments referred before me, I am fully convinced with the submissions made on behalf of the respondents that the internship is part of study whereas two years experience is related with the actual working in the rural areas. The date of completion of the course may be different than the cut off date to determine the two years experience. The petitioners' case cannot be equated qua with the general M.B.B.S candidates. In my considered opinion as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments referred hereinabove, the petitioner does not stand at equal footing with the M.B.B.S fresh candidate, therefore, the instructions/guidelines issued by the University are not hit by the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In my considered opinion as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments referred hereinabove, the petitioner does not stand at equal footing with the M.B.B.S fresh candidate, therefore, the instructions/guidelines issued by the University are not hit by the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Since the petitioners have not challenged the instructions issued by the University on the ground of malafides, therefore, in view of the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashwani Kumar Singh (supra) this Court while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution, if the petitioners are able to make out case, the University of Rajasthan acted malafidely in fixing the cut off date as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that cut off position is not to be tinkered with unless it is irrational and tainted with malafides." 33. In case of Madhu Singh (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the calendar for examination and counselling and admission and to start the new course, therefore, to comply with the instructions and directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the University has rightly fixed the cut off date as 13.2.2005, i.e., the date of examination to count the two years experience. 34. So far as application of principle of estoppel is concerned, since the petitioners appeared in the written examination and they have not protested while appearing in the examination, therefore, at this stage, they are estopped to challenge the action of the respondents regarding fixing cut off date to count the experience. 35. In view of the aforesaid submissions, I do not find any fault in fixing the cut off date by the University as 13.2.2005 to count the two years actual experience for In Service candidates to adjudge the suitability for admission in Pre PG Medical Examination, 2005. 36. Consequently, all the writ petitions fail and hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.Petition dismissed. *******