Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 3547 (MAD)

S. Pari v. Secretary to Government, Chennai

2013-09-30

M.SATHYANARAYANAN, R.K.AGRAWAL

body2013
Judgment All the writ petitions are disposed of by this Common Order as issue involved in these writ petitions, is one and the same. 2. W.P.No.22670 of 2013: (i) The petitioner claims that he belongs to Hindu Vanniyar Community which is a Most Backward Community and his son studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1152, out of 1200 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 195. (ii) It is stated by the petitioner that the 1st counselling was scheduled on 20.06.2013 for the purpose of allotting 1823 seats. Out of which, 565 students were selected against open competition and the particulars of candidates selected in 1st counselling on 20.06.2013 are as follows: Sl. No. Community No. of Seats 1. OC 565 2. BC 483 3. BCM 64 4. MBC 365 5. SC 273 6. SCA 55 7. ST 18 Total 1823 (iii) It is further stated by the petitioner that additional seats proposed to be filled in the 2nd counselling on account of the approval given by the Medical Counsel of India are 356 in Government Medical Colleges, 714 in Self-Financing Colleges and 84 in Government Dental Colleges are proposed to be filled in the subsequent counselling commenced on 06.08.2013. (iv) It is the case of the petitioner that MBC candidates belong to Most Backward Category upto Rank No.2291 were already accommodated against MBC quota and on the date of the 2nd counselling on 06.08.2013, no MBC candidates were available for allotment against open quota because all of them are accommodated even in the 1st counselling and the same has resulted in prejudice to the persons like the petitioner. The petitioner has also quoted in similar cases in Venkatnarayanan, who belongs to MBC category and A. Vishakan belongs to BC category and stated that Venkatanarayanan could not be selected as open quota and was selected against MBC quota and the next candidate name, A. Vishakan was selected against open competition in the 2nd counselling and it was on account of incorrect procedure adopted by the 2nd respondent in the matter of conducting MBBS counselling. Therefore, the petitioner came forward to file the writ petition. 3. W.P.No.22671 of 2013: (i) The petitioner belongs to Hindu Vanniyar community and her daughter studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1164 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 195. Therefore, the petitioner came forward to file the writ petition. 3. W.P.No.22671 of 2013: (i) The petitioner belongs to Hindu Vanniyar community and her daughter studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1164 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 195. The petitioner made similar averments as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.22670 of 2013. (ii) The petitioner also filed the additional affidavit stating among other averments that additional MBBS seats sanctioned by the Medical Council of India and consequently, 349 seats were added to earlier notified seats of 1823 and the total MBBS seats in Government Medical Colleges got increased to 2172. Thus, 356 additional seats were distributed among different communal categories as follows:- OC 110 BC 95 BCM 12 MBC 71 SC 53 SCA 11 ST 4 Total 356 (iii) The petitioner stated that the Selection Committee commenced the third unit of Phase I on 06.08.2013, to fill up the 71 BDS seats in Government Dental Colleges and 711 seats of Government quota in MBBS in private self financing colleges, aggregating to 782 seats and the said seats are distributed as follows:- OC 242 BC 208 BCM 27 MBC 156 SC 117 SCA 24 ST 8 Total 782 (iv) The petitioner has done his own calculation and according to him, the third unit of 242 OC seats shall be added to 676 in open category, resulting in a total of 918 OC pool quota and to fill up 242 seats in open competition, re-allotment have been made commencing from GR 677 and ending with GR 1000. (v) The petitioner claims that instead of their actual entitlement of 18 and 147 seats under the 242 open competition seats, the others and Backward Class candidates have got undue allotment in excess of their share, and actually got 34 and 206 seats, resulting the excess admission of 16 and 59 seats, totally in 75 seats. It is a claim of the petitioner that injustice has been met out by the MBC candidateson account of the above said proceedings and hence, filed the said writ petition. 4. It is a claim of the petitioner that injustice has been met out by the MBC candidateson account of the above said proceedings and hence, filed the said writ petition. 4. The 2nd Respondent filed his counter and rejoinder stating, among other things, that 349 additional seats were created after obtaining the permission of Medical Council of India for the academic session 2013-2014 and thus, the total seats available in Government Medical Colleges got increased to 2172 and adding the seats available in Government Dental Colleges, Government Quota in Self Financing MBBS Colleges and Government Quota in Self Financing Dental Colleges, the total seats is 3908 and to fill up those seats, counselling was conducted category-wise. It is stated by the 2nd respondent that the Notification issued by the Medical Council of India with regard to increase of seats, it has to be implemented for the corresponding year and out of 1823 seats, 49 special category candidates were allotted under special categories. 5. It is further stated by the 2nd respondent that the rank/mark of the allotted candidate under open category is 198.25 and from this cut-off onwards, the community-wise apportionment was filled up in the counselling for 1823 seats and took a stand that the community-wise presentation is in order and the statement of the petitioner is not at all correct. 6. According to the 2nd respondent, the apportionment of seats should be calculated only for the increased seats of 349 and in respect of 7 seats in which the concerned candidates have not joined and the revised OC component is 673 and the cut-off mark is 198.25 with General Rank 678. Nd. In the rejoinder affidavit of the 2nd respondent, the cut-off mark for 1st Phase of counselling and the particulars with regard to the re-allotment was conducted on 05.08.2013 has been given and the same is extracted below: Category General Rank Community Rank Total Mark OC 566 - 198.25 BC 1330 848 197.50 BCM 2423 77 196.25 MBC 2291 465 196.50 SC 5749 289 193.50 SCA 8069 51 191.25 ST 11801 18 187.25 8. It is a specific stand of the 2nd respondent that MBC category candidates upto General Rank 2291 with the mark 196.50 participated on 5.8.2013 for re-allotment between Government Medical Colleges and according to the schedule, if any candidate is willing to join in self-financing MBBS, it is open for them to attend the counselling as per the General Rank for getting allotment for self-financing MBBS. 9. In paragraph 13 of the rejoinder, the details regarding the allotment of MBC category candidates under Open Category in the 1st Phase and in the 2nd Phase and also in the reserved category are given and the same is extracted below: I. Open Category Component (I & II Phase) I Phase Counseling II Phase Counseling OC (FC) 44 50 BC 378 442 BCM 16 18 MBC 110 140 SC 17 21 SCA - 1 ST - 1 Total 565 673 II. Reserved Category Component (I & II Phase) I Phase Counseling II Phase Counseling OC (FC) 565 673 BC 483 576 BCM 64 76 MBC 365 434 SC 276 328 SCA 52 63 ST 18 22 Total 1823 2172 10. It is a specific stand of the 2nd respondent that any consideration of MBC quota selected candidates under Open Category will adversely affect the reservation component of other categories and will result in imbalance in merit and community component also and therefore, it is not feasible to conduct the counselling as a single unit for all the four categories, as the minimum eligibility marks differ from MBBS to BDS as per Prospectus and everything has been done in a transparent manner. 11. W.P.No.23442 of 2013: (i) The petitioner claims that she belongs to Vanniya Kula Kshatriya Community which is classified as Most Backward Community and her son studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1146, out of 1200 marks and the cut-off mark is for Medical counselling is 194.75. (ii) According to the Petitioner, the 2nd counselling which was commenced on 06.08.2013, classification and categorisation of MBC candidates had not been done correctly and the statutory prescription has not been followed at all and it is also against the Prospectus. (ii) According to the Petitioner, the 2nd counselling which was commenced on 06.08.2013, classification and categorisation of MBC candidates had not been done correctly and the statutory prescription has not been followed at all and it is also against the Prospectus. The petitioner, in order to stress the point, has given the calculation and the same is extracted below: Date OC BC BCM MBC SC SCA ST Total 06.08.2013 49 350 3 nil - - - 402 07.08.2013 06 212 2 71 - - - 291 08.08.2013 06 - 25 86 - - - 117 10.08.2013 - - - 95 - - - 95 12.08.2013 - - 8 - 179 35 13 235 TOTAL 61 562 38 252 179 35 13 1141 Percentage 5% 49% 3.3% 22% 15.6% 3% 1% 100% (iii) The petitioner further claims that the persons upto 810 rank were selected for MBBS course and upto 833 rank were selected for BDS course, resulted in consequential denial and deprivation of the opportunity of getting admission in the subsequent counselling held on 06.08.2013 in the MBC category on the pretext that no MBC candidates were available for allotment against the quota and hence, filed the writ petition. W.P.No.22662 of 2013: 12. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Hindu Vanniyar Community which is a Most Backward Community and his son studied Higher Secondary 1-B Group and secured 1142 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 195. The petitioner would be very same stand as that of the writ petitioners in W.P.Nos.22670 and 22671 of 2013. W.P.No.25226 of 2013: 13. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Backward Class Muslim Lebbai Community and her daughter studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1157 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 194.75. The petitioner made similar point as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.23442 of 2013. W.P.No.25302 of 2013: 14. The petitioner claims that she belongs to Muslim Lebbai Community which is a Backward Class Community and her daughter studied Higher Secondary course in 1st Group and secured 1165 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 194.75 and the petitioner took the similar stand as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.25226 of 2013. W.P.No.25270 of 2013: 15. The petitioner claims that she belongs to Muslim Lebbai Community which is a Backward Class Community and her daughter studied Higher Secondary course in 1st Group and secured 1165 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 194.75 and the petitioner took the similar stand as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.25226 of 2013. W.P.No.25270 of 2013: 15. The petitioner claims that she belongs to Hindu Vanniyar Community which is a Most Backward Class Community and her son studied Higher Secondary 1st Group and secured 1144 marks and the cut-off marks for Medical counselling was 194.50 and she took the similar stand as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.23442 of 2013. 16. The respective learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners had contended that Clauses 24 and 33 of the Prospectus had been given a complete global and during the 2nd Phase of counselling, Most Backward Class candidates belong to MBC community under the Open category normally would have got the seats having been selected and some of them though entitled to get admission in Government Medical Colleges/Dental Colleges, but got admission only in self-financing Colleges and consequently, they have to shell out huge sum of money by way of tuition fees etc. 17. It is the further submission of the respective learned counsel for the petitioners that the Selection Committee has deviated from its own process which was conducted on 05.08.2013 and bypassing the re-allotment process, by combining 1826 + 356 + 782 = 2964 seats and filled 919 Open Competition seats by merit, commencing the selection with GR 1 and ending with 919 Open Competition selection in appropriate GR rank position and consequently wrong procedure has been followed for selection in respect of 782 seats and thereby eligible MBC candidates and MBC Muslim candidates, their seats and therefore, pray for appropriate direction directing the respondents to treat the MBC/BCM candidates selected against MBC/BCM quota as having been selected against open quota to the extent for enabling the MBC/BCM candidates who were deprived of their opportunity to participate in the 2nd counselling and further direct the respondents to select the sons/daughters of the respective petitioners against their quota. 18. Mr. 18. Mr. Arvind Pandian, learned Additional Advocate General has invited the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit and rejoinder filed by the 2nd respondent in W.P.No.22671 of 2013 and would submit that the petitioners done their own calculation without legal basis and adopted some kind of method for selection of their wards and it is neither practicable and nor inconsonance with the procedure/practice followed by the Selection Committee. 19. The learned Additional Advocate General has also invited the attention of this Court to the rejoinder filed by the 2nd respondent and would submit that the apportionment of seats after the approval of increasing seats granted by Medical Council of India, the revised OC component is 673 and the cut-off mark is 198.25 in General Rank 678 and the claim of special category candidates such as physically handicapped etc. have also been taken into account. 20. Attention of this Court was also invited to paragraph 13 of the rejoinder more particularly, the Tabular Column which was extracted in the earlier paragraph and it is the submission of the learned Additional Advocate General that the Tabular Column makes it very clear that the selection of candidates was done in most transparent manner and the claim of the petitioners that the students coming under MBC quota are to be selected under Open Category, will adversely affect the reservation component and would ultimately resulting in imbalance in merit and community component also and hence, it is not at all feasible to conduct the counselling as a single unit for all the four categories as suggested by the petitioners. 21. The learned Additional Advocate General, in support of his submission, has placed reliance upon the order dated 21.09.2012 passed in W.P.No.21026 of 2012 wherein similar contention was raised and rejected by the learned Judge and would further submit that no appeal has been filed and it has become final. Hence, the learned Additional Advocate General prays for dismissal of all these writ petitions. 22. The learned Additional Advocate General has also given the list of candidates selected in the I, II and III final Phase. Hence, the learned Additional Advocate General prays for dismissal of all these writ petitions. 22. The learned Additional Advocate General has also given the list of candidates selected in the I, II and III final Phase. A perusal of the materials placed before it would disclose that candidates allotted under Open Category commenced with a basic candidate with a total mark of 200 and the last BC candidate in the total mark of 198.25 and thereafter, two candidates were selected under Ex-serviceman quota and Physically Handicapped and both are belong to Open Competition Category and they secured the total mark of 198.50 and 195.00 respectively. Insofar as the Most Backward Class Category is concerned, it is started with Rank No.704 with a total mark of 198.25 and it ended with the candidate in Serial No.435 and he secured teh total mark of 196 marks and below him, 14 candidates were selected under Physically Handicapped quota. 23. Admittedly, all the petitioners, except two petitioners who belong to Muslim Backward Class Category, belong to MBC category and they secured the total mark less than 196. 24. In the rejoinder affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, it has been made very clear that any consideration of MBC quota selected candidates under Open category will adversely affect the reservation component of other candidates and resulting in imbalance in merit and community component. A Single Bench of this Court in the order dated 21.09.2012 made in W.P.No.21026 of 2012 has considered the similar issue and considered the cut-off marks in respect of various category and found that the petitioner therein cannot be selected as her cut-off mark was less than the prescribed marks. In the case on hand, the cut-off marks obtained by candidates belong to MBC category are less than the cut-off marks of the last candidates selected under MBC category and therefore, some of them having got admission in the Government Medical Colleges but Self-Financing Medical Colleges. If the contention of the petitioners is to be accepted, then, the entire counselling for all candidates have to be re-done and the same is not only against the interest of the students who are more very meritorious than the petitioners but it will also affect the reservation component of other categories and will have a cascading effect. 25. If the contention of the petitioners is to be accepted, then, the entire counselling for all candidates have to be re-done and the same is not only against the interest of the students who are more very meritorious than the petitioners but it will also affect the reservation component of other categories and will have a cascading effect. 25. It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.25226 and 25302 of 2013 that they were selected in the III and last Phase of the counselling on 22.08.2013 and in spite of it, the petitioners want to press the writ petitions for adjudication on merits. 26. In the light of the reasons assigned above, this Court is of the considered view that the points urged by the writ petitioners lack merit. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are dismissed. Consequently, interim orders granted by this Court in the miscellaneous petitions are vacated and all the miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.