JUDGMENT I.A. Ansari, J. 1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of the writ petition, which has been registered as WP(C) No. 354 of 2011, and also the writ appeal, which has arisen out of the judgment and order, dated 09-11-2011, passed in WP(C) No. 337 of 2011, whereby the writ petition stands dismissed inasmuch as the decision in any of the two, namely, the writ petition or the appeal, would have a bearing on the outcome of the other, because some of the issues, raised in the appeal and the writ petition, are closely interlinked and wholly inseverable. 2. Before we come to the merit of the writ petition and the appeal, it is necessary to, first, take note of the material facts, which have given rise to the present appeal and, then, take note of the material facts involved with the writ petition. The material facts, leading to the present appeal, are, therefore, set out, in brief, herein below: (i). Out of the Appellants, who are 17 in numbers, as many as 9 Appellants appeared in Tripura Board of Secondary Education (in short, 'the TBSE'), 6 of the Appellants appeared in the Central Board of Secondary Examination (in short, 'the CBSE') and the remaining two Appellants appeared in Indian School Certificate Examination (in short, 'the ISCE'). All of them secured more than 40% marks, in aggregate, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together and being, thus, qualified to appear in the Joint Entrance Examination (in short, 'the JEE') conducted by the Tripura Board of Joint Entrance Examination for admission into the MBBS course, in the year 2011, against 25 seats, reserved for candidates of Scheduled Tribe belonging to the State of Tripura, the Appellants, as members of the Scheduled Tribe, appeared in the JEE pursuant to the notification, dated 28.12.2010, issued, in this regard, by Tripura Board of Joint Entrance Examination. (ii). (ii). While inviting applications from candidates for JEE, it was, nowhere, mentioned by the Tripura Board of Joint Examination in the notification, dated 28-12-2010, that a student, who appears as a Scheduled Tribe candidate, has to secure a minimum of 40% marks in the JEE and, in consequence thereof, the Appellants claim to have remained unaware of the fact that they would be required to secure minimum 40% marks in the JEE, too, in order to qualify for allotment of seats in the MBBS course from the State quota meant for the candidates of the Scheduled Tribe. This apart, though the Medical Council of India (in short, 'the MCI') suggested to the State Government to provide coaching to the candidates of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe so as to enable them to compete and qualify in the JEE, no such coaching was ever provided to the Appellants and other similarly situated persons; hence, no condition for securing of minimum marks, in the said three subjects, in the JEE, could have been legally insisted upon by the Respondents. (iii). Moreover, no cut-off marks, for allotment of seats to the candidates in the MBBS course, as prescribed by the MCI, was, in the past, insisted upon by the Tripura Board for allowing admission into the MBBS course; but, all of a sudden, the State Respondents, at the time of counseling, informed the Appellants and other similarly situated candidates that none of them had secured, in the JEE, 40% marks, which was the prescribed cut-off marks for the candidates of Scheduled Tribe, in the JEE, and, hence, no seat for admission into the MBBS course could be allotted to the Appellants. As a result thereof, out of the total number of 25 seats, reserved for the candidates of Scheduled Tribe in the State of Tripura, as many as 23 seats have remained vacant. Similarly, though two seats in the said Medical College of the State are meant for the candidates of Scheduled Caste belonging to the State of Tripura, both these seats have remained vacant due to the fact that although the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste did secure more than 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in their qualifying examination, namely, TBSE, CBSE and ISCE, they have not been able to secure, as indicated hereinbefore, 40% marks in the JEE. Aggrieved by the conduct of the Respondents, the Appellants filed a writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which gave rise to WP(C) No. 337/2011, challenging the decision of the Respondents not to admit the writ Petitioners, i.e., the present Appellants, into the MBBS course against the quota meant for the candidates of Scheduled Tribe of the State. (iv). What was, in substance, pointed out, on behalf of the writ Petitioners, in the writ petition (which has given rise to the present appeal), was that the Respondents/authorities concerned having not provided any coaching for improvement of the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe so as to enable them to complete and qualify in the JEE and having also not informed the candidates, while inviting applications by notification, dated 28.12.2010, for JEE, that even the candidates, belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, as the case may be, would have to secure minimum 40% marks, in the JEE too, in order to become eligible for admission into the MBBS course against the quota meant for such candidates in the State, the Respondents/authorities concerned could not have rejected the candidature of the writ Petitioners, (i.e., the present Appellants), on the ground that though they had secured more than 40% marks, in aggregate, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in their respective qualifying examination, i.e., TBSE, ISCE and CBSE, wherein some of the writ Petitioners, i.e., the present Appellants, had secured 70%, 74% etc, marks), they had failed to secure the minimum 40% marks, in the JEE, as required by the regulations of the MCI. The act of refusal to admit the writ Petitioners (i.e., the present Appellants) into the MBBS course on the ground that the Appellants had not secured 40% marks, in the JEE, as indicated hereinbefore, was bad in law, particularly, when, according to the writ Petitioners (i.e., the present Appellants), the requirement of fulfilling the minimum marks of 40%, prescribed under the regulations of the MCI, is, in the light of the decision, in State of M.P. v. Nivedita Jain AIR 1981 SC 2045 , merely directory and not mandatory and the Respondents ought not to have, therefore, adhered to their decision not to allow the Petitioners to be admitted into the MBBS course on the ground that they had not secured the minimum required marks of 40%, in the said three subjects, in the JEE. (v). Resisting the writ petition, which has given rise to the present appeal, the Respondents, in the writ petition, submitted, in effect, that the regulations of the MCI, when made with the consent of the Central Government, become statutory in nature and have the force of law. These regulations, including the regulations, which prescribe, in respect of the reserved category candidates, securing of 40% marks, in the JEE, as the minimum mark for becoming eligible for admission into the MBBS course, the same is mandatory in nature and that the State Government does not have the power to admit, contrary to the said Regulations, any candidate in its Medical College. This apart, the Respondents pointed out, in the writ petition (which has given rise to the present appeal), that the regulations of the MCI were duly published in the official Gazette and must, therefore, be presumed to be known to all concerned including the writ Petitioners (i.e., the present Appellants). This apart, the Respondents pointed out, in the writ petition (which has given rise to the present appeal), that the regulations of the MCI were duly published in the official Gazette and must, therefore, be presumed to be known to all concerned including the writ Petitioners (i.e., the present Appellants). The decision, in Nivedita Jain (supra), pointed out the Respondents, which had laid down that holding of JEE or the prescription of securing minimum percentage of marks, in the JEE, is merely directory and not mandatory, has been disagreed to by the Supreme Court in its subsequent decisions and, hence, the decision, in Nivedita Jain (supra), can no longer be described as a good law with the result that the prescription of securing minimum percentage of marks, in the JEE, by even the candidates, belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, is mandatory in nature and cannot be deviated from by a State, while admitting candidates into the MBBS course. (vi). A learned Single Judge of this Court, having found force in the above submissions, made on behalf of the Respondents, has dismissed the writ petition. Feeling aggrieved, the writ Petitioners are before us in appeal. Thus, the rejection of the candidature of the writ Petitioners (i.e. the present Appellants) on the ground of their failure to secure minimum 40% marks in the JEE, though each one of them has individually secured more than 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in their respective qualifying examination, namely, TBSE, CBSE and ISCE, was upheld in the writ petition and it is against this finding and the dismissal of the writ petition that the present appeal has been preferred by those, who were the Petitioners in the writ petition. 3. Having indicated the case of the Appellants, we, now, turn to the case of those persons, who are writ Petitioners in WP(C) No. 354 of 2011. 3. Having indicated the case of the Appellants, we, now, turn to the case of those persons, who are writ Petitioners in WP(C) No. 354 of 2011. Their case is, in brief, thus: In the State of Tripura, Tripura State Board is the only State Board, which conducts the qualifying examination in Higher Secondary (10+2) and, in such a State, no JEE or combined competitive examination was required to be held inasmuch as the Regulations 4 and 5 of the MCI, if read together, would clearly reveal that the basic qualification, for admission into the MBBS course, is passing of higher secondary or equivalent examination, namely, TBSE, CBSE and ISCE, with not less than 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the Higher Secondary (10+2) or the equivalent examination, these examination having been described by the MCI's regulations as the qualifying examination and that in the case of a State, such as, Tripura, where, there is only one State Board conducting the qualifying examination, namely, TBSE, holding of the JEE, which the MCI's regulations describe as combined competitive examination, is not at all necessary. The inter se merit list of the candidates, who obtain requisite marks in the qualifying examination, shall, therefore, according to these writ Petitioners, become the basis of selection for admission into the MBBS course in a State like Tripura. 4. In short, what the writ Petitioners contend, in the present writ petition, namely, WP(C) 354/2011, is that in the State of Tripura, there being only one Board, conducting the qualifying examination, no joint entrance examination (JEE) or combined competitive examination is necessary and that inter se merit of the eligible candidates, in the qualifying examination, shall become the basis for selection for admission into the MBBS course. These writ Petitioners also contend that in the States, where more than one Board or University or Examining Body conducts qualifying examination, the holding of combined competitive examination is, in the light of the decisions, in Nivedita Jain's case (supra), optional and even if the combined competitive examination is required to be held, the requirement of a candidate (belonging to Scheduled Tribe), securing minimum 40; marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in combined competitive examination, cannot be insisted upon, because when a candidate, in a State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining body conducting qualifying examination, may, in a given case, receive admission into the MBBS course if he finds place in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the result of the qualifying examination, provided that he satisfies the basic pre-requisite of obtaining 40; marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, there is no reason why a candidate, who has already satisfied the minimum eligibility criterion of obtaining 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, cannot be selected for admission into the MBBS course in a State, where there are more than one University/Board/Examining body for conducting qualifying examination, if his name finds place in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the result of the combined competitive examination. 5. Thus, according to these writ Petitioners, when the basic eligibility for admission into the MBBS course is securing of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination(s), namely, TBSE, CBSE and ISCE, the insistence, by the MCI's regulations, that a candidate, appearing in the JEE or combined competitive examination, must obtain 40% marks in the JEE or the combined competitive examination, too, in the said three subjects, in order to become eligible for consideration for admission into the MBBS course, is discriminatory, irrational, illogical, arbitrary and does not, therefore, withstand the test of reasonableness and non-arbitrariness guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution. 6. 6. To put it a little differently, what the writ Petitioners, in WP(C) 359/2011, while challenging the vires and constitutionality of the MCI's regulations, contend, is that the basis of selection of candidates for admission into the MBBS course, in a State, where there is only one university, board or examining body conducting qualifying examination, is the requirement of obtaining of minimum 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination and, consequently, it is possible for a candidate, in such a State, to enter into the MBBS course if he has satisfied the criterion of obtaining the minimum of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination provided that his name finds place in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the result of the qualifying examination; whereas, a candidate, in a State, where there are more than one university, board or examining body conducting qualifying examination, a candidate, in order to become eligible for admission into the MBBS course, is required to not only obtain minimum 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, but he must also obtain, in the combined competitive examination, 40% marks in the said three subjects, even if his name can be placed in the inter se merit list against the quota available to him for admission into the MBBS course. Thus, while a candidate with minimum 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, may enter into the MBBS course in a State, where there is only one university, board or examining body conducting qualifying examination, a candidate, in a State, where there are more than one university, board or examining body conducting qualifying examination, would become ineligible to get admission into the MBBS course if he does not secure 40% marks in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination too. This insistence of obtaining of 40% marks, in the combined competitive examination, is, according to the writ Petitioners, wholly irrational, unreasonable, arbitrary, and discriminatory and the same may, therefore, not be upheld. 7. We have heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Appellants, and Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Govt. Advocate, for the State Respondents. We have also heard Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned ASG, for the MCI. 8. 7. We have heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Appellants, and Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Govt. Advocate, for the State Respondents. We have also heard Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned ASG, for the MCI. 8. While considering the present appeal as well as the writ petition, the common grounds of challenge need to be carefully discerned. It is the stand of the writ Appellants as well as the writ Petitioners that in the State of Tripura, there is only one secondary Board, namely, TBSE, which conducts the qualifying examination and, hence, it is Regulation 5(5)(i) of the MCI, which ought to have been applied. In other words, according to the Appellants as well as the writ Petitioners, the State of Tripura, being a State, which has only one Education Board, namely, the Tripura State Board, which conducts the qualifying examination, Tripura shall be taken to be a State, where one Board is conducting qualifying examination and in such a case, the requirement of holding of combined competitive examination, as prescribed by Regulation 5(5)(ii) of the MCI, ought not to have been insisted upon. The second contention, while challenging the refusal of the Respondents to allow the writ Appellants as well as the writ Petitioners' admission into the MBBS course, is that even if Regulation 5(5)(ii) is applicable to the State of Tripura, the application of Regulation 5(5)(ii) is merely directory and not mandatory. Reliance in support of this contention is placed to the case of Nivedita Jain (supra). 9. Besides the above two grounds of challenge, which are common in nature in both the writ appeal as well as writ petition, the present writ petition puts to challenge the decision of the Respondents on yet another ground and the ground of challenge is the requirement of Regulation 5(5)(ii) that a candidate, for the purpose of finding his place in the merit list, prepared on the basis of the combined competitive examination, must be one, who has obtained the minimum of 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the combined competitive examination. The requirement of obtaining 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, has been put to challenge on the ground that this condition is irrational, unreasonable, discriminatory, wholly arbitrary and, therefore, does not withstand the test of Article 14 inasmuch as it is possible that in a State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, conducting the qualifying examination, a candidate, who has obtained 40% marks, in the said three subjects in the qualifying examination, may obtain admission into the MBBS course by merely securing 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in qualifying examination, because the merit list is prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the qualifying examination and a candidate, who has obtained merely 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, may find his place in the inter se merit list, whereas a candidate, in a State, where there are more than one Board/University/Examining body, which conducts qualifying examination, is required not only to appear in a combined competitive examination, but also obtain 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, too, in order to receive admission into the MBBS course. 10. The dichotomy, according to these writ Petitioners, is that a candidate, in a State, where there is more than one University/Board/Examining Body, conducting qualifying examination, has to, first, satisfy the norm of securing, at least, 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, and, then, again, he is required to obtain minimum 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination too, though he may have, otherwise, been able to obtain admission on the basis of the merit list prepared out of the result of the qualifying examination if he has been a candidate in a State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining body for conducting qualifying examination provided his name figured in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the qualifying examination. The embargo of securing 40% marks for the second time, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, is, thus, according to these Petitioners, wholly discriminatory, irrational, unreasonable, and arbitrary and cannot be said to withstand the test of Article 14. 11. The embargo of securing 40% marks for the second time, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, is, thus, according to these Petitioners, wholly discriminatory, irrational, unreasonable, and arbitrary and cannot be said to withstand the test of Article 14. 11. In other words, according to these writ Petitioners, Regulation 5(5)(ii), which requires not only holding of combined competitive examination (i.e., JEE), but also prescribes obtaining of 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the JEE or combined competitive examination, as the minimum qualifying mark for obtaining admission into MBBS course, is in violation of Article 14 and what ought to have been done by the MCI, according to these writ Petitioners, was to conduct combined entrance examination (i.e., JEE) and, on the basis of the marks obtained in such an examination, inter se merit list ought to have been drawn, as is done in the case of the State(s), where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body conducting qualifying examination, and, on the basis of such merit list, candidates ought to have been admitted into the MBBS course without insisting upon the condition of securing of 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the combined competitive examination or JEE too. These writ Petitioners contend that when a candidate of every Board, which conducts qualifying examination, is equally eligible for consideration for admission into MBBS course on the basis inter se merit list if he has the minimum qualifying marks of 40%, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination(s), namely, TBSE, CBSE and ISCE, if he is from a State, which has not more than one University/Board/Examining body conducting qualifying examination, the insistence by the MCI that even in the combined competitive examination (i.e., JEE), a candidate must secure 40; marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology for admission into the MBBS course, is bad in law inasmuch as such a combined entrance examination (i.e. JEE) is conducted to determine the inter se merit of the eligible candidates and, in the inter se merit list of the eligible candidates, if a candidate's name appears, he ought to be granted admission into the MBBS course even if he has not secured the minimum prescribed marks of 40%, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination (i.e. JEE). 12. 12. In the backdrop of the grievances of the Appellants as well as the writ Petitioners, let us, now, determine how far the Respondents have been able to meet the challenges posed to their scheme of selection prescribed by the MCI regulations. 13. For better appreciation of the issue involved, the relevant portions of Regulations 4 and 5 are reproduced herein below: 4. Admission to the Medical Course-Eligibility Criteria: No candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum proper of first Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) Course until: (1) He/she shall complete the age of 17 years on or before 31st December of the year of admission to the MBBS Course. (2) He/she has passed qualifying examination as under: (a) The higher secondary examination or the Indian School Certificate Examination, which is equivalent to 10+2 Higher Secondary Examination after a period of 12 years study, the last two years of study comprising of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Mathematics or any other effective subjects with English at a level not less than the core course for English as prescribed by the National Council for Educational Research and Training after the introduction of the 10+2+3 years educational structure as recommended by the National Committee on education. 5. Selection to Students. The selection of students to medical college shall be based solely on merit of the candidate and for determination of merit, the following criteria be adopted uniformly throughout the country: (1). In States, 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 examination conducted by different agencies. (3). Where there are more than one college in a state and only one university/board/examining body 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 institutions of All India character. 5. (3). Where there are more than one college in a state and only one university/board/examining body 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 institutions of All India character. 5. Procedure for selection to MBBS course shall be as follows: i) In case of admission on the basis of qualifying examination under Clause (1) based on merit, the candidate for admission to MBBS course must have passed in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and 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 Clause (2) or 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% as above. ii) In case of admission on 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% marks taken together in Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the qualifying examination as mentioned in Clause (2) or Regulation 4 and in addition must have come in the merit list prepared as a result of such competitive entrance examination by securing not less than 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology taken together in the competitive examination. 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 and competitive entrance examination be 40% instead of 50% as stated 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 competitive entrance examination and in case of selection for admission to the MBBS course, he shall not be admitted to that course until he fulfils the eligibility criteria under Regulation 4. The following has been added before the proviso to Clause 5(5)(ii) in terms of notification published on 25.03.2009 and the same is annexed as Annexure-VIII. The following has been added before the proviso to Clause 5(5)(ii) in terms of notification published on 25.03.2009 and the same is annexed as Annexure-VIII. Provided that the eligibility criteria for admission to persons with locomotors disability of lower limbs in terms of Clause 4(3) above will be a minimum of 45% marks instead of 50% taken together in qualifying examination and competitive entrance examination for admission in MBBS course. 14. From a cautious and careful reading of Regulations 4 and 5, as a whole, what clearly transpires is that a candidate, in order to become eligible for admission into the MBBS course, must not only have passed the qualifying examination, the qualifying examination being Higher Secondary examination or an equivalent examination, but must have also secured minimum 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination. The Regulations also provide that where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, a candidate, who has secured minimum of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination, is eligible for admission into the MBBS course and an inter se merit list of such eligible candidates, who come forward to take admission into the MBBS course, has to be prepared and if such a candidate finds place in the inter se merit list, prepared on the basis of the result in the qualifying examination, he shall become entitled to receive admission into the MBBS course and there is no other limitation or restriction on the admission of such a candidate. It is, therefore, quite possible, in such a State, that a candidate enters into the MBBS course even if he has obtained only the minimum required marks of 40%, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination. This is the scheme of Regulation 5(5)(i). 15. As against the above scheme of admission in a State, wherein there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, Regulation 5 (5) (ii) imposes further restrictions, for the purpose of admission into the MBBS course, in the case of a State, wherein more than one University/Board/Examining Body conduct the qualifying examination. 15. As against the above scheme of admission in a State, wherein there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, Regulation 5 (5) (ii) imposes further restrictions, for the purpose of admission into the MBBS course, in the case of a State, wherein more than one University/Board/Examining Body conduct the qualifying examination. The condition, laid down by Regulation 5(5)(ii), is that there must be combined competitive examination, popularly known as Joint Entrance Examination (or JEE), and a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, in such a State, must, apart from having secured 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, at the qualifying examination, secure 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the combined competitive examination (i.e. JEE) too. 16. More elaborately speaking, as against the above scheme meant for admission, where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, Regulation 5(2) read with Regulation 5(5)(ii) provides that where there are more than one University/Board/Examining Body, which conduct the qualifying examination, a combined competitive examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at the qualifying examination conducted by the different agencies and, in this regard, Regulation 5(5)(ii) further lays down that in such a case, a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, is required not only to secure, at least, 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, at the qualifying examination, but he must, in order to become eligible for consideration for admission into the MBBS course, obtain a minimum of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, at the combined competitive examination, too. 17. 17. Thus, the language, used in Regulation 5(1) read with Regulation 5(5)(i) vis-a-vis Regulation 5(2) read with Regulation 5(5)(ii), makes it abundantly clear that if there is a State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, then, the marks, obtained at such a qualifying examination, will be the basis for selection for admission into the MBBS course subject to the condition that a candidate, belonging to reserved category, in such a State, ought to have obtained a minimum of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, at the qualifying examination, but where there are more than one University/Board/Examining Body, which conduct the qualifying examination, there should be a combined competitive examination so as to achieve a uniform evaluation. In such a combined competitive examination, in order to obtain admission into the MBBS course, a general category candidate must secure a minimum of 50% marks, taken together, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology; whereas a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Classes, must obtain, at least, 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination as well as the competitive entrance examination. 18. What emerges from the above discussion is that Regulation 5 (1) read with Regulation 5(5)(i), while laying down the procedure for selection of candidates for admission into the MBBS course, makes it clear that the State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination, a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, would receive admission into the MBBS course in terms of the inter se merit list of the candidates prepared on the basis of the result in the qualifying examination even if he has secured merely 40; marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination inasmuch as there is no further examination, in the form of combined competitive examination or JEE, and no requirement of further cut-off mark. 19. What is, now, imperative to note, which is transparent from the case of the Appellants themselves, is that as many as 9 of them have passed the qualifying examination conducted by the TBSE, 6 of them have passed the qualifying examination conducted by the CBSE and the remaining two have passed the qualifying examination conducted by the ISCE. Clearly, therefore, there are three Boards, which are conducting the qualifying examination in the State of Tripura. Clearly, therefore, there are three Boards, which are conducting the qualifying examination in the State of Tripura. Thus, in Tripura, it is Regulation 5(2) read with Regulation 5 (5) (ii), which would be applicable and have been applied in the present case. 20. Referring to Nivedita Jain (supra), it has been contended, on behalf of the Appellants, by Mr. Bhowmik, learned Senior counsel, that even in a State, where there are more than one University/Board/Examining Body conducting qualifying examination, it is not mandatory to hold a combined competitive examination inasmuch as Regulation 5(ii) is merely directory and not mandatory. Suffice it to point out, in this regard, that much water has flown since the decision, in Nivedita Jain (supra), was rendered and in Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Anr. v. State of M.P. and Ors. (1999) 7 SCC 120 , a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has overruled the decision, in Nivedita Jain (supra), by holding that Regulation 5(ii) is not merely directory, but mandatory. 21. There can, therefore, be no escape from the conclusion, in the light of the decision in Dr. Preeti Srivastava (supra), that so long as Regulation 5(5)(ii) is treated as valid in its entirety, there ought to have been held, and has been rightly held, in the State of Tripura, combined competitive examination (i.e., JEE) for admission into the MBBS. If Regulation 5 (5) (ii) is found valid, as a whole, the Respondents cannot be said to have committed any illegality in conducting combined competitive examination or JEE or in refusing to admit the writ Petitioners as well as the Appellants into the MBBS course on the ground that they have not been able to secure, at least, 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the combined competitive examination or JEE, though they have obtained 40% marks, in the said three subjects in the qualifying examination. 22. 22. It further follows from the above discussion that the contention of the Appellants that in the State of Tripura, TBSE is the only Board, which conducts the qualifying examination and Regulation 5(2) read with Regulation 5(5)(ii) is not attracted, has no substance at all inasmuch as Tripura is a State, wherein more than one Board, as already indicated hereinabove, have been conducting the qualifying examination and, hence, the combined competitive examination or JEE, as perceived by Regulation 5 (2) read with Regulation 5(5)(ii), is mandatory provided that this Court upholds the Regulation 5(5)(ii) in its entirety. 23. Considering the fact that Tripura is a State, where more than one Board conducts and has been conducting the qualifying examination and Regulation 5(5)(ii) is applicable, it logically follows that so long as Regulation 5(ii) is treated as valid in its entirety, a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Tribe, ought to obtain, at least, 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination or JEE in order to become eligible for admission into the MBBS course; and the mere fact, that seats are still lying vacant, cannot be a ground or reason for demanding that the requirement of securing 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the JEE or combined competitive examination, be not insisted upon. 24. As neither the Appellants nor the writ Petitioners, which has given rise to WP(C) No. 354 of 2011, have obtained the minimum of 40% marks in the competitive entrance examination or JEE, as envisaged by Regulation 5(5)(ii), they were not eligible and have rightly not been treated as eligible for admission into the MBBS course provided that Regulation 5(5)(ii) is upheld by this Court as a valid piece of Regulation in its entirety. 25. Let us, therefore, now, determine if Regulation 5(5)(ii) is a valid piece of Regulation. 26. The thrust of the various decisions and the character of the judicial pronouncements, on the question of nature of applicability of the regulations of the MCI, is that Medical Council of India is a creature of the Indian Medical Council Act, which is a piece of legislation relatable to Entry 66 of List I of the Union List. 26. The thrust of the various decisions and the character of the judicial pronouncements, on the question of nature of applicability of the regulations of the MCI, is that Medical Council of India is a creature of the Indian Medical Council Act, which is a piece of legislation relatable to Entry 66 of List I of the Union List. Any legislation, made pursuant to Entry 66 List I, shall prevail upon the State enactment to the extent that the State enactment, which is made pursuant to Entry 25 or 26 of the List III (Concurrent List), is repugnant to the legislation made under Entry 66. The Regulations, made by the Medical Council of India with the approval of the Central Government, acquire statutory force. Reference, in this regard, may be made to Medical Council of India v. State of Karnataka and Ors. reported in 1998 6 SCC 131 . 27. There is no dispute, in the present case that the Regulations, made by the MCI, would prevail on the State legislation, if any, or on the State's scheme, if any, for admission into the MBBS course. What was, however, contended, as already indicated above, in the writ petition, which has given rise to the appeal, is that Regulation 5 (5) (ii) of the MCI, which insists that a candidate must secure a minimum of 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination in order to become eligible for consideration for admission into the MBBS course, is not mandatory. Reliance, in support of this proposition, as has been noticed, was placed on State of M.P. v. Nivedita Jain AIR 1981 SC 2045 . The decision, in Nivedita Jain (supra), has, however, been disagreed to, and specifically overruled, in Dr. Preeti Srivastava (supra), wherein the Constitution Bench, at para 56, has observed and held thus: 56. In State of M.P. v. Nivedita Jain (1981) 4 SCC 296 , the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act and the regulations framed for undergraduate medical courses were considered by the Court. The Court said that while Regulation I was mandatory, Regulation II was only recommendatory and need not be followed. We do not agree with this line of reasoning for the reasons which we have set out above. 28. The Court said that while Regulation I was mandatory, Regulation II was only recommendatory and need not be followed. We do not agree with this line of reasoning for the reasons which we have set out above. 28. What emerges clearly is that Regulations of the MCI would prevail if legislation of a given State comes in conflict with the MCI Regulations. 29. What also clearly emerges from the above discussion is that Regulation 5(5) (ii) requiring holding of the combined competitive examination for admission into the MBBS course in a State, where more than one University/Board/Examining Body conducts the qualifying examination, is mandatory. These two aspects cannot be disputed and have, at the end of the hearing, not, in fact, been disputed. 30. The question, which, however, remains to be decided is: whether the prescription of securing 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology by candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, is a valid condition, when a counterpart of such a candidate would be qualified to be admitted into the MBBS course if his name falls in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the qualifying examination alone provided that he has obtained 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination. It is, thus, the vires of the Regulation 5(5)(ii), which is under challenge in the writ petition, namely, WP(C) 254/2011. 31. While considering the above aspect of the matter, it needs to be noted that in Visveswaraiah Technological University and Anr. v. Krishnendu Halder and Ors. reported in (2011) 4 SCC 606 , the Supreme Court, having clearly held that the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), which has been established under All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987, for proper planning and coordinated development of technical education throughout the country is competent to make rules governing admission into higher education and that determination of standards fixed by them are beyond the purview of judicial review, has, nevertheless, pointed out that non-interference in exercise of power of judicial review is hedged by the condition that standard fixed shall not be arbitrary. The relevant observations, made in this regard, which appear at para 17, read as under: 17. The relevant observations, made in this regard, which appear at para 17, read as under: 17. No student or college, in the teeth of the existing and prevalent rules of the State and the University can say that such rules should be ignored, whenever there are unfilled vacancies in colleges. In fact, the State/University may, in spite of vacancies, continue with the higher eligibility criteria to maintain better standards of higher education in the State or in the colleges affiliated to the University. Determination of such standards, being part of the academic policy of the University, are beyond the purview of judicial review, unless it is established that such standards are arbitrary or "adversely affect" the standards, if any, fixed by the central body under a Central enactment. The order of the Division Bench is, therefore, unsustainable. (Emphasis supplied) 32. From what has been observed, in Visveswaraiah Technological University's case (supra), it becomes abundantly clear and leaves no room for doubt that the Constitutionality of a regulation of the MCI can be challenged on the ground that it is arbitrary. The question, therefore, which we have to, now, determine is: Whether Regulation 5(5)(ii) is rational, non-arbitrary, and reasonable and can withstand the test of Article 14. 33. While considering the above aspect of the case, it needs to be very carefully noted that a candidate, who has passed the qualifying examination, conducted by any of the University/Board/Examining Body, is eligible for admission into the MBBS course if he has obtained a minimum of 40% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination, provided that he finds a place in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the qualifying examination. 34. A minute reading of Regulation 5(5)(ii) leaves no room for doubt that combined competitive examination has been insisted upon, and rightly so, in order to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at various qualifying examination conducted by different agencies. 35. Thus, it is merely to bring uniformity in the evaluation that the combined competitive examination is conducted so that inter se merit list of these candidates can be prepared, who have passed, with minimum required marks, the qualifying examination from various Universities/Boards/Examining Bodies and have sought for admission into the MBBS course. 36. 35. Thus, it is merely to bring uniformity in the evaluation that the combined competitive examination is conducted so that inter se merit list of these candidates can be prepared, who have passed, with minimum required marks, the qualifying examination from various Universities/Boards/Examining Bodies and have sought for admission into the MBBS course. 36. Was it, then, reasonable and rational, on the part of the MCI, to fix 40% as minimum required marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics, in the combined competitive examination, too, for obtaining admission into the MBBS course ? The irrationality, in this requirement, can be illustrated thus: Let us assume that Tripura is a State, wherein it is TBSE alone, which conducts the qualifying examination; Assam is a State, where, let us assume, it is only the CBSE, which conducts the qualifying examination and, similarly, West Bengal, let us assume, is a State, wherein ISCE is the only body, which conducts the qualifying examination. A candidate, in any of these States, can get admission into their Medical College if he secures a minimum of 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination, provided that he falls in the inter se merit list drawn on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in the qualifying examination. It can also be clearly seen that the results of the qualifying examination, held by each of the bodies, which conducts the said qualifying examination, can become the basis for drawing inter se merit list of the candidates for admission into the MBBS course. Consequently, in such a case, even a candidate, who has obtained the minimum requisite marks of 40%, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination, can get admitted into the MBBS course if his name finds place in the inter se merit list drawn on the basis of the result of the qualifying examination. Let us, now, assume that the same candidate moves over to, say, the State of U.P., where more than one University, Board or the Examining Body conducts the qualifying examination. In such circumstances, on the basis of the combined entrance examination, a merit list is drawn. This merit list is drawn only out of the candidates, who have secured, if he belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, the minimum required marks of 40% in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination. 37. In such circumstances, on the basis of the combined entrance examination, a merit list is drawn. This merit list is drawn only out of the candidates, who have secured, if he belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, the minimum required marks of 40% in Physics, Chemistry and Biology in the qualifying examination. 37. Ordinarily, on the basis of the merit list, prepared by holding combined competitive examination, admission into the MBBS course ought to have been granted, because each of the candidates, who participates in the combined competitive examination, has already obtained the minimum required marks of 40%, in the said three subjects, in the qualifying examination as is done in the case of a State, wherein only one University, Board or examining Body conducts the qualifying examination. Why the MCI Regulations insist on securing 40% marks by a candidate, in the combined competitive examination, too, is not discernible from the Regulations, when there is no such restriction or requirement imposed in the case, where there is only one University, Board or examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination. To a pointed query made by this Court, even Mr. Biswas, learned ASG, could not explain as to why the MCI has insisted that a candidate, appearing in the combined competitive examination, must secure 40% marks in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, even if the candidate is one, who has secured 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the qualifying examination, whereas a candidate, who has secured 40; marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination (in a State, where only one University/Board/Examining Body conducts the qualifying examination) can get admission into the MBBS course if his name finds place in the inter se merit list prepared on the basis of the result of the qualifying examination alone. 38. Thus, there is no reason as to why a candidate, appearing in the combined entrance examination, who has already satisfied the requirement of obtaining minimum 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the qualifying examination, must also obtain minimum 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination. 38. Thus, there is no reason as to why a candidate, appearing in the combined entrance examination, who has already satisfied the requirement of obtaining minimum 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the qualifying examination, must also obtain minimum 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination. Logically speaking, if, in the combined competitive examination, such a candidate falls within the merit list prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the combined competitive examination, he ought to be granted admission into the MBBS course and if he is to be denied admission, then, the MCI must explain the reason for doing so and the reason assigned must be rational. 39. In the present case, the MCI has completely failed to assign any reason, far less convincing and plausible reason, for insisting upon securing of minimum 40% marks by Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates in the combined entrance examination too. 40. It has been faintly attempted by Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned ASG, to suggest that the idea of insisting upon 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, and is to secure best of the candidates on merit. This claim, made by Mr. Biswas, on behalf of the MCI, falls flat, when one notices that a candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, has the possibility of entering into the MBBS course in the State, where only one University/Board/Examining Body has conducted the qualifying examination, if such a candidate has secured minimum 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the qualifying examination and his name finds place in the merit list drawn on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in the qualifying examination. This is precisely what has been in the present case. Similarly, therefore, after holding combined entrance examination in the States, where more than one University/Board/Examining Body have been conducting the qualifying examination, a candidate ought to be selected on the basis of inter se merit list drawn of such candidates, because every candidate, in the combined competitive examination, has already satisfied the minimum prescribed requirement of securing of 40; marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, taken together, in the qualifying examination. If, in the combined competitive examination, he does not find place in the inter se merit list as against the quota available to him, then, such a candidate can have no grievance; but, if he, otherwise, finds place in the merit list against the quota meant for him, he cannot, without a rational cause, be denied admission into the MBBS course, when he has already satisfied the requirement of obtaining entry into the MBBS course by securing the required minimum 40% marks, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the qualifying examination. The purpose of holding the combined competitive examination ought to have been only to prepare an inter se merit list of the various candidates, who had appeared in the qualifying examinations conducted by various University/Board/Examining bodies. No reason could be assigned, as already indicated above, as to why there shall be insistence on obtaining 40; marks by a candidate, in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in the combined competitive examination for getting admission into MBBS course. 41. It needs to be, now, noted that though the regulations, framed by the MCI, have been upheld by the Supreme Court in its various judicial pronouncements, the fact of the matter remains that in none of the decisions, cited and relied upon, the constitutionality and/or vires of the Regulation 5(5)(ii) have been put to challenge. When the issue has not specifically been raised and has not been decided, the constitutionality of the MCI's Regulation 5(5)(ii) remains open for challenge on the ground of its irrationality. Considered in this light, it is open to this Court to determine if the insistence by the MCI that a candidate, who appears in the combined competitive examination, must secure, in order to be able to enter into MBBS course, minimum of 40% marks, in the said three subjects, in the combined competitive examination, is irrational, when there is no such restriction, under Regulation 5(5)(i), in respect of a candidate of a State, where there is only one University/Board/Examining Body, which conducts the qualifying examination. The logic for having two different standard is not discernible, when we find that as many as 20 seats, in the quota meant for the candidates of Scheduled Tribe, belonging to the State of Tripura, have remained without being filled up due to the condition so imposed by Regulation 5(5)(ii), whereas all the Appellants would have been admitted into the MBBS course, in the State of Tripura, if there would have been only one University/Board/Examining Body, conducting the qualifying examination. It needs to be borne in mind that, in order to pass the test of Article 14, it is not enough for the State to assign 'a' reason; every reason, assigned by the State, must be rational and convincing. In the present case, the MCI has miserable failed to disclose the rationality behind introducing the cut-off mark of 40% in the combined competitive examination or JEE too. 42. Because of what have been discussed and pointed out above, What becomes clear, and we do hold, is that the MCI Regulation 5 (5) (ii) is in violation of Article 14, which guarantees equality of treatment, so far as Regulation 5(5)(ii) requires securing of 40% marks in the combined competitive examination as the basis for selection for admission into the MBBS course. 43. In the result and for the reasons discussed above, the appeal as well as the writ petition succeed. The Respondents are hereby directed to prepare a merit list of the candidates on the basis of the marks obtained by them, in the combined competitive examination (JEE), and those candidates, who find their place in the merit list, so prepared against their respective quota of seats, shall be admitted into the MBBS course within a week from today. 44. With the above observations and directions, this appeal and the writ petition shall stand disposed of. 45. No order as to costs.