Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 658 (GUJ)

Chowdhary Navin Hemabhai v. State of Gujarat

2009-10-09

AKIL KURESHI, K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN

body2009
Judgment K.S. Radhakrishnan, CJ.—Petitioners who belong to the reserved category had applied for admission for Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (‘M.B.B.S.’) course in the State of Gujarat after passing either the qualifying examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education or the examination conducted by Gujarat Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Board. Petitioners had also appeared in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test (“GUJCET” for short) conducted for the academic year 2008-09. Petitioners submitted they had satisfied eligibility criteria stipulated in the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 for admission to the M.B.B.S. Course and their names figured in the merit list prepared by the Admission Committee for Professional Medical Educational Courses (“Admission Committee” for short). They were accordingly given admission to first year M.B.B.S. Course in respondent No.3 - Pramukhswamy Medical College, Karamsad for the year 2008-09. List of students admitted to the College was forwarded by the respondent No.3 college to the Medical Council of India vide their letter dated 06.10.2008. Medical Council of India after perusal of the list noticed that college had given admission to eight students in violation of Regulation 5(5)(ii) of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 since they had not obtained minimum required marks in the PMT/Entrance Examination conducted by the State Government. Consequently, third respondent college was directed to discharge those students and report compliance. 2. The Dean of the College then addressed a letter to the Chairman, Central Admission Committee, Ahmedabad informing him of the directions given by the Medical Council of India to discharge eight students from their college. Admission Committee then addressed a letter to the Dean of the third respondent College on 22.12.2008 informing that as per the Rules framed by the State Government, candidates are only required to appear in the GUJCET conducted in the current academic year, after obtaining the necessary marks in the qualifying examination. Dean of the college also sent a communication to the Medical Council of India vide his letter dated 09.01.2009 informing the stand taken by the State Government. 3. Medical Council of India, however, maintained the stand that students were wrongly admitted to the college in violation of eligibility criteria laid down in Regulation 5(5) (ii) of the Graduate Medical Education, 1997 and hence, they be discharged. 3. Medical Council of India, however, maintained the stand that students were wrongly admitted to the college in violation of eligibility criteria laid down in Regulation 5(5) (ii) of the Graduate Medical Education, 1997 and hence, they be discharged. Admission committee vide their letter dated 16.02.2009 again addressed a letter to the Medical Council of India referring to Rule 5.1(iv), 5.4(iv) and stated that students already admitted on the basis of the rules framed by the State Government be permitted to continue their studies. Further, it was also pointed out that the admission committee is in the process of recommending to the State Government to modify Rules so as to apply the minimum criteria of eligibility laid down as per Regulation 5(5)(ii) of Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997. 4. Medical Council of India, however, did not accede to the request made by the College as well as Admission Committee and reiterated their stand that admissions were given to the petitioners contrary to Regulations 5(5)(ii) in Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997, therefore, directed college to discharge the students. The stand of the Medical Council of India was also informed to the Commissionerate of Health, Medical Education, Gujarat State by the Medical Council of India vide their letter dated 05.05.2009. Faced with that situation, the Dean, Pramukhswamy Medical College, Karamsad issued notice of discharge to the petitioners informing that in conformity with the directives issued by the Medical Council of India, college has no alternative but to discharge them from the college. Additional Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, Health and Family Welfare Department again vide their letter dated 17.07.2009 informed the Medical Council of India that admissions were given to First Year M.B.B.S. Course for the academic year 2008-09 as per the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 and as per Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Rules the students were only expected to appear in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test conducted in the academic year 2008-09. 5. Government of Gujarat, later amended the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 by notification No.GP-11-MCG-1008-3544-J dated 26.05.2009 and as per which minimum qualifying standard in Gujarat Common Entrance Test for admission to the Professional Medical Educational courses have been prescribed as per the guidelines of the Medical Council of India. Government of Gujarat, later amended the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 by notification No.GP-11-MCG-1008-3544-J dated 26.05.2009 and as per which minimum qualifying standard in Gujarat Common Entrance Test for admission to the Professional Medical Educational courses have been prescribed as per the guidelines of the Medical Council of India. Further it was stated that for the academic year 2009-2010, all the students would be admitted to the first year M.B.B.S. as per the amended Rules, 2009. However, a request was made to safeguard the interest of 23 students who were so admitted to the first year M.B.B.S. in academic year 2008-09. Medical Council of India, however, insisted strict enforcement of the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India. Faced with that situation, petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction to Medical Council of India to withdraw its objection to the admissions of the petitioners at third respondent college on the basis of Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 and also for consequential relief. 6. Learned Counsel Mr. Udayan P. Vyas appearing for the petitioners submitted that petitioners were admitted to first year M.B.B.S. course in the third respondent college on the basis of the merit list prepared by the second respondent - admission committee strictly as per the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008. Learned Counsel submitted that all the petitioners had satisfied eligibility criteria laid down in Rule-5 of the Rules. Learned Counsel referred to the Notification dated 02.06.2008 and submitted that all the petitioners had secured minimum marks required for qualifying examination conducted by various examination Boards. Learned Counsel also pointed out that as per the notification, the reserved category candidates are required to obtain minimum 40 % marks, in aggregate, in theory subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology at 12th Standard of Science Stream in order to become eligible for admission to either medical or a dental course. Petitioners belong to reserved category and all of them satisfied requirement of having minimum 40 % marks in aggregate in the said three theory subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology of 12th Standard examination in Science Stream. Further, they had also appeared in the entrance examination conducted in the State since that was the only requirement as per the Rules framed by the State Government. Further, they had also appeared in the entrance examination conducted in the State since that was the only requirement as per the Rules framed by the State Government. Petitioners had also completed First Year M.B.B.S. course and consequently, there is no justification in discharging them from the college, especially when they have not committed any mistake. Learned Counsel also submitted that in any view of the matter, in such a situation, considering the fact that petitioners belong to reserved community, interest of justice demands that equitable consideration be meted out to them. 7. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Mathur vs. Karnataka University and Another, AIR 1986 SC 1448 and submitted that Apex Court in the similar situation had permitted the students of Engineering College to pursue their studies since the students had not committed any mistake in securing admission to the course. Learned Counsel submitted that the principle laid down by the Apex Court would apply to the facts of the present case as well. 8. Learned Counsel, Shri D.C. Dave, appearing for the third respondent College also supported the case of petitioners and same is stand taken by the learned Asst. Government Pleader appearing for the State. 9. Learned Counsel Shri Mitul K. Shelat, appearing for the Medical Council of India, however, took strong objection contending that Medical Council of India cannot dilute the standard which is uniformly applied all over the country. Learned Counsel referred to the Regulations of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 framed by the Medical Council of India. Reference was also made to the Regulation 4 (Chapter-II) which says that no candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum of first Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) Course until student satisfies eligibility criteria laid down under the regulations. Reference was made to Regulation 5.5(ii). Reference was also made to the Regulation 4 (Chapter-II) which says that no candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum of first Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) Course until student satisfies eligibility criteria laid down under the regulations. Reference was made to Regulation 5.5(ii). Further, it was also submitted that in States, having more than one University/Board/ Examining Body conducting the qualifying examination, a competitive entrance examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation and in case of admission on the basis of Competitive Entrance Examination, a candidate must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50 % of marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination and in addition must have come in the merit list prepared as a result of such competitive entrance examination by securing not less then 50 % marks in theory of Physics, Chemistry and Biology competitive examination. However, in respect of the candidates belonging to Schedule Caste, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Class, the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology taken together in qualifying examination and competitive entrance examination be 40 % instead of 50 %. Learned Counsel submitted that above-mentioned stipulation is statutory in nature therefore, all are bound by those statutory stipulations. 10. Learned Counsel submitted that the moment Medical Council of India was informed of that illegal admission, the Council addressed a communication to the college to discharge the students. Communications were also sent to the Admission Committee and even to the Commissionerate of Health & Family Welfare and Medical Education, State of Gujarat. Learned Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital and Others, (2001) 8 SCC 664 and submitted that statutory stipulation prescribed by the Medical Council of India cannot be diluted by the State Government and also submitted that State Government cannot unilaterally frame a scheme reducing standard in violation of terms of Regulations framed by Medical Council of India. Learned Counsel also made reference to another judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Harish Verma and Others vs. Ajay Srivastava and Another, (2003)8 SCC 69 and submitted that attaining minimum qualifying marks has a direct relation with the standards of education and if the State Government has a case for making a departure from the standards laid down by the Medical Council of India or for carving out an exception in favour of any identifiable class of persons, then it is for the State to represent to the Central Government and/or Medical Council of India and make out a case of justification before the Medical Council of India but it cannot do voluntarily. Learned Counsel for the Medical Council of India also submitted that in light of the clear statutory provisions, petitioners are not entitled to any equitable consideration. Learned Counsel also submitted that the State Government in its letter dated 17.07.2009 indicated that in all 23 students appeared in Gujarat Common Entrance Test and they were admitted to First Year MBBS Course and they are also similarly placed. Learned Counsel for Medical Council of India also submitted that steps would be taken to discharge them also from First Year MBBS Course, if their admissions are irregular. 11. Regulations for Graduate Medical Education, 1997 was framed by Medical Council of India in exercise of the powers under Section 33 read with Section 19-A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 was Act passed by the Parliament in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry 66 of List I of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. Section 19A of above-mentioned Act, stipulates minimum standard of education which reads as under : “19A. Minimum standards of medical education.— (1) The Council may prescribe the minimum standards of medical education required for granting recognized medical qualifications (other than post-graduate medical qualifications) by Universities or medical institutions in India. (2) Copies of the draft regulations and of all subsequent amendments thereof shall be furnished by the Council to all State Governments and the Council shall, before submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof, as the case may be, to the Central Government for sanction, take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from furnishing of the copies as aforesaid. (3) The Committee shall from time to time report to the Council on the efficacy of the regulations and may recommend to the Council such amendments thereof as it may think fit.] 13. Above mentioned statutory provisions empowered Medical Council of India to prescribe minimum standards of medical education required for granting recognized medical qualifications other than post-graduate medical qualification by the Universities or Medical Institutions in India. Thus, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 33 read with Section 19A of the Act, the Medical Council of India framed the Regulations of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 which was published in Part III of the Gazette of India dated 17.05.1997. Sub-section (2) of Section 19A says that it is obligatory on the part of the Medical Council of India to forward draft regulations and also subsequent amendments to all the State Governments and the Council, shall before submitting the regulations or any amendment thereof to the Central Government for sanction, take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the furnishing of the copies. Only after following the above-mentioned formalities, Regulations of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 was issued. Further, the regulation stipulates that no candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum of First Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) until he satisfies eligibility criteria prescribed in the Regulations. Regulation 5 deals with ‘Selection of students’ and the provision reads as follows: “The selection of students to medical college shall be based solely on merit of the candidate and for determination of the merit, the following criteria be adopted uniformly throughout the country: 1. In State, having only one Medical College and one University board/examining body conducting the qualifying examination, the marks obtained at such qualifying examination may be taken into consideration; 2. In States, having more than one university/board/ examining body conducting the qualifying examination (or where there is more than one medical college under the administrative control of one authority) a competitive entrance examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at qualifying examinations conducted by different agencies; 3. Where there are more than one college in a State and only one university/board conducting the qualifying examination, then a joint selection board be constituted for all the colleges; 4. Where there are more than one college in a State and only one university/board conducting the qualifying examination, then a joint selection board be constituted for all the colleges; 4. A competitive entrance examination is absolutely necessary in the cases of Institution of All India Character. Regulation-5.5 deals with ‘Procedure for selection to MBBS course’ which reads as follows: i. In case of admission on the basis of qualifying examination under clause (1) based on merit, candidate for admission to MBBS course must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology & English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50 % marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination as mentioned in the clause (2) of Regulation 4. In respect of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes or Other Backward Classes, the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together in qualifying examination be 40 % instead of 50 %. ii. In case of admission of the basis of competitive entrance examination under Clause (2) to (4) of this regulation, a candidate must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50 % of marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination and in addition must have come in the merit list prepared as a result of such competitive entrance examination by securing not less then 50 % marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology competitive examination. In respect of the candidates belonging to Schedule Caste, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Class, the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology taken together in qualifying examination and competitive entrance examination be 40 % instead of 50 % as above. Provided that a candidate who has appeared in the qualifying examination the result of which has not been declared, he may be provisionally permitted to take up the competitive entrance examination and in case of selection of admission to the MBBS course, he shall not be admitted to that course until he fulfills the eligibility criteria under Regulation 4.” 14. Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997 are framed by Medical Council of India in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 19-A read with Section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997 are framed by Medical Council of India in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 19-A read with Section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. The Act was enacted by the Parliament in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry 66 of List I in the Seventh Schedule. The standards prescribed by the Medical Council of India for medical education under the Regulations are binding on the State Government and Universities and they are bound to follow and comply with statutory standards so prescribed by the Medical Council of India. Above legal position is well settled by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Preeti Srivastava vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1999 SC 2894 wherein the Apex Court was dealing with the Regulations for admission to Post Graduate medical education. The Court held that those regulations are binding and the State cannot, in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry 25 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution makes rules and regulations which are in conflict with or adversely impinge upon the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India for post graduate medical education. Court held that since the standard laid down are in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry 66 of List I, the exercise of that power is exclusively within domain of the Union Government under Entry 66 of List I. Court held that the Scheme of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 does not give an option to the Universities to follow or not to follow the standards laid down by the Indian Medical Council. The Universities must necessarily be guided by the standards prescribed under Section 20(1) if their degrees or diplomas are to be recognized under the Medical Council of India Act. Above judgment was followed by Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital and Others, (2001) 8 SCC 664 . The Universities must necessarily be guided by the standards prescribed under Section 20(1) if their degrees or diplomas are to be recognized under the Medical Council of India Act. Above judgment was followed by Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital and Others, (2001) 8 SCC 664 . In that case, State of Punjab lowered minimum qualifying marks to 40 % for speciality subjects and doing away with them altogether for basic subjects, contrary to Regulation 9 of Medical Council Regulations which prescribed 50 % minimum marks, the Court held that prescription made by the State of Punjab reducing minimum marks to 40 % in the entrance examination for considering eligibility of the candidates for admission to Post Graduate Medical Courses and in respect of basic subjects fixing no minimum standard is plainly in contravention of the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India and that part of the notification will have to be ignored. Same is the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Harish Verma and Others vs. Ajay Srivastava and Another, (2003) 8 SCC 69 , Apex Court struck down admissions given to in-service candidates who secured less than minimum marks prescribed by Regulation 9 framed by the Medical Council of India. 15. We have to test legality of Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Rules in light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in above-referred judgments. Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 has been issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 20 read with Section 4 of the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fees) Act, 2007. Rule 5(1) is extracted hereunder for easy reference. “5. Rule 5(1) is extracted hereunder for easy reference. “5. Eligibility for admission.—(1) For the purpose of admission, a candidate shall have passed with ‘B-group’ or ‘AB-group’ the qualifying examination from,— (i) the Gujarat Board; or (ii) the Central Board of Secondary Education Board provided that the school in which the candidate has studied, should have been located in the State of Gujarat; or (iii) the Council of India School Certificate Examination, New Delhi Board provided that the school in which the candidate has studied should have been located in the State of Gujarat; and (iv) appeared in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test conducted in the current academic year; (v) Sanskrit is compulsory either in 10th or 12th science for candidate seeking admission in Ayurved.” The expression “Qualifying Examination” is defined under Sub-rule (i) to Rule 2 to mean that the High Secondary School Certificate Examination, (Standard XII, 10 + 2 pattern) passed in the Science Stream or equivalent examination. “Gujarat Common Entrance Test (‘GUJCET’) is defined under Sub-rule (h) of Rule 2 to mean that the common entrance test conducted by the Gujarat Board for the purpose of admissions to the professional courses. Rule 12 deals with Minimum qualifying standard for admission provides that no students shall be admitted in the professional medical educational course unless he/she fulfills the eligibility criteria, including the minimum qualifying marks (standard). Minimum qualifying standards for admission have been notified by the State in its Official Gazette from time to time. Rule 11 deals with `Preparation of merit list for admission” which provides that the Merit list of candidates who have applied for admission in the prescribed form, within the prescribed time limit and who are found eligible for admission under these rules, shall be prepared in the manner that the candidates who have passed qualifying examination from the Gujarat Board, sixty percent of marks obtained from total 300 marks in theory of the Physics, Biology and Chemistry subjects combined with the forty percent of marks obtained from the total 120 marks in the Physics, Biology and Chemistry subjects in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test (GUJCET), shall be the merit marks. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 11 provides that the Admission Committee shall prepare and publish two separate merit lists, viz. (a) the first merit list shall include the candidates who have passed the qualifying examination from the Gujarat Board. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 11 provides that the Admission Committee shall prepare and publish two separate merit lists, viz. (a) the first merit list shall include the candidates who have passed the qualifying examination from the Gujarat Board. Merit list of reserved category candidates shall be prepared separately and (b) the second merit list shall include the candidates who have passed the qualifying examination from the other Boards, Merit list of reserved category candidates shall be prepared separately. 16. Petitioners in this case belong to reserved categories, admittedly secured less than 40 % marks in aggregate in three subjects for entrance examination. Stand of the petitioners, the College and the State Government is that as per Rule 5(1)(iv), a candidate is expected only to appear in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test and need not obtain the minimum marks prescribed by the Medical Council of India in view of Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Rules framed by the Government of Gujarat. Entry 25 of List III (Concurrent List) to Seventh Schedule to Constitution deals with education, including technical education, medical education and universities, subject to the provisions of entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List-I. Above mentioned Act was framed by the State Legislature in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry 25 of List-III of the Seventh Schedule. Both the Union as well as the States therefore have the power to legislate on education including medical education, subject, inter alia, to Entry 66 of List I which deals with laying down standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions as also co-ordination of such standards. The State has, therefore, the right to control education including medical education so long as the field is not occupied by any Union Legislation. Under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Medical Council of India is empowered to prescribe the minimum standards of medical education including the post graduate medical education. Thus, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 19A read with Section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Medical Council of India has framed Regulations which govern medical education. Those Regulations are binding and the State can not in exercise of the powers under Entry 25 of List III make Rules and Regulations which are in conflict with or adversely impinge upon the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India for medical education. Those Regulations are binding and the State can not in exercise of the powers under Entry 25 of List III make Rules and Regulations which are in conflict with or adversely impinge upon the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India for medical education. Standards laid down are in the exercise of the power conferred under Entry 66 of List I, the exercise of that power is exclusively within the domain of the Union Government. Power of the States under Entry 25 of List III is subject to Entry 66 of List I and it cannot be said that the power of the Indian Medical Council to prescribe the minimum standards of medical education is not binding on the State Governments. 17. The State Government, admission committee and the colleges are bound by Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India for medical education. It has been specifically stated in Regulation 4 of the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 framed by Medical Council of India that no candidates shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum of first Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) Course in the States, having more than one University/Board /examining body conducting the qualifying examination (or where there is more than one medical college under the administrative control of one authority) a competitive entrance examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at qualifying examinations conducted by different agencies. Following the above regulations, State Government conducted the common entrance test for all those students who have passed qualifying examination from various examining bodies. Regulation 5.5(ii) of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 stipulated that in case of admission of the basis of competitive entrance examination, a candidate must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English individually and must have obtained a minimum of 50 % of marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination and in addition must have come in the merit list prepared as a result of such competitive entrance examination by securing not less then 50 % marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology competitive examination. In respect of the candidates belonging to Schedule Caste, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Class, the marks obtained in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology taking together in qualifying examination and competitive entrance examination be 40 % instead of 50 %. Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 is in direct conflict with Regulation 5.5(ii) of the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 framed by the Medical Council of India. Fixing minimum qualifying marks for passing the entrance test for admission to graduate and post-graduate medical education, falls within domain of the Union Government under Section 19A and Section 20 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Once minimum standard is laid down in exercise of the statutory powers by the Medical Council of India, the State Government cannot dilute that standards. State is bound to follow that standards set by the Medical Council of India and if they have any difficulty they have to approach the Medical Council of India for fixing appropriate standards in this behalf and the State Government cannot unilaterally frame a rule reducing the standard in violation of the terms of the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India. 18. The above legal position, we have already indicated, is settled by the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Preeti Srivastava vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1999 SC 2894 , Narayan Sharma (Dr.) vs. Dr. ankaj Kumar Lehkar, (2000) 1 SCC 44 , Medical Council of India vs. State of Karnataka, (1998) 6 SCC 131 . Same is the view expressed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital (Supra) and Haresh Verma and Ohers vs. Ajay Srivastava and Aother, (Supra), wherein the Apex Court was dealing with the provisions of admission to the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. Principle laid down in the above-mentioned decisions squarely apply to the facts of the present case as well. 19. We, therefore, strike down Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Gujarat Professional Medical Education Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 stipulating appearance in Gujarat Common Entrance Test as an eligibility criteria for admission to the Professional Medical Education College or Institution in the State. 19. We, therefore, strike down Rule 5(1)(iv) of the Gujarat Professional Medical Education Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) Rules, 2008 stipulating appearance in Gujarat Common Entrance Test as an eligibility criteria for admission to the Professional Medical Education College or Institution in the State. We declare that mere appearance in GUJCET is itself not an eligibility criteria for admission for admission to the Gujarat Professional Medical Educational Course in the State but they have to satisfy the Regulation 5.5(ii) of Graduate Medical Education, 1997 framed by the Medical Council of India. Petitioners have not satisfied above mandatory stipulation laid down by Medical Council of India and hence, we find no illegality in the directions given by the Medical Council of India to discharge the petitioners from the third respondent college. 20. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that they have already completed the first year of M.B.B.S., hence, their case be considered sympathetically. We find it difficult to accept that contention, especially, in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in various decisions. Even otherwise, equity is not a part of law. When the law is well settled, equity has no place. Equity has to follow law. Law made by the Parliament is superior and the Judge has to merely determine what the Parliament has said in the enactment and apply the words of statute to the case at hand. It is beyond power of a Judge to read equitable exceptions into statute on the hardships projected by the affected parties ignoring the purpose and object of the statute. Minimum standards are prescribed by Regulations to maintain standards of medical education which a Writ Court cannot dilute on equitable consideration. Minimum standards has been prescribed in public interest by the Medical Council of India. Courts are not permitted to dilute those standards prescribed by the expert body in exercise of its statutory powers. If the power is vested on a Judge to administer inequitable equities, that would be de hors the statute and a Judge will be re-writing the statute usurping the powers of law makers. In the instant case, if we lean in favour of equitable consideration then we will be diluting the standards fixed by the Expert Bodies in public interest and for the people at large. Hence, plea for equitable consideration does not appeal to us. In the instant case, if we lean in favour of equitable consideration then we will be diluting the standards fixed by the Expert Bodies in public interest and for the people at large. Hence, plea for equitable consideration does not appeal to us. Under the circumstances, writ petition lacks merits and the same stands dismissed.