Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1009 (HP)

Asha Negi v. State of H. P.

2015-08-04

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. Both these writ petitions are being disposed of together by this common judgment as the issues involved and the reliefs sought are overlapping. 2. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by the medium of instant petitions commanding the respondents to offer seats to the petitioners for admission to postgraduate (MD/MS) Degree courses, lying vacant after the thirdand final round of counseling, which seats were earlier allotted to the candidates who participated in the previous rounds of counseling but had not deposited the requisite fee within the stipulated time frame, on the grounds taken in the memo of writ petitions. 3. In CWP No.3179 of 2015, the petitioner participated in the third round of counseling, and, on the basis of merit obtained in the competitive examination, was allotted seat in the specialty of Physiology. The petitioner thereafter deposited the fee on 4th June, 2015. Since a candidate, who was offered a seat in the specialty of Radio Therapy, had not deposited the fee, as required, therefore, the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to offer seats lying vacant after the third round of counseling to the candidates who had already been allotted seats. 4. In CWP No.3238 of 2015, the petitioner was allotted seat in ENT specialty. It is contended that a candidate, who was offered a seat in the specialty of Orthopedics, did not deposit the fee within the time frame, therefore, the petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to allot him the said seat, which is lying vacant after third round of counseling. 5. While going through the writ petitions, it appears that the petitioners have tried to carve out a case on the basis of the judgment, dated 18th June, 2015, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of writ petitions, the lead case of which was CWP No.1776 of 2015, titled Dr.Vivek Kumar Garg and others vs. State of H.P. and others, whereby the entire admission process for postgraduate Degree(MD/MS) Courses stood quashed and the respondents were directed to re-do the entire selection process strictly as per the merit list. It is apt to reproduce paragraph 28 of the said decision hereunder: “28. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed. It is apt to reproduce paragraph 28 of the said decision hereunder: “28. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed. The allotment of seats/roster points on the basis of sub-groups comprising of regularly appointed Medical Officers, contractual and Rogi Kalyan Samiti appointees and sub groups comprising of regular Medical Officers (Dental) and second group comprising of contractual and Rogi Kalyan Samiti appointees as per clause 3.1(A) (i) of the Prospectus-cum-Application Form for counselling and admission for postgraduate Degree(MD/MS) Courses and clause 3.6(b)(iii) of the Prospectus-cum-Application Form for counselling and admission for postgraduate Degree(MDS) Courses for the academic session 2015-18, respectively, are quashed and set aside. The admissions made to MD/MS/MDS courses on the basis of the first counselling, second counselling and 3rd counselling under clause 3.1(A)(i) of both the Prospectus under HPHS (Inservice GDO) Group and in-service GDO (MO Dental) Group seats are also quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to re-do the entire selection process by filling up the MD/MS/MDS seats, strictly as per the merit list on the basis of All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination and All India Post Graduate Dental Entrance Examination, within a period of one week from today in order to adhere to the time schedule framed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India qua HPHS (In-service GDO) Group and in-service GDO (MO Dental) Group. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.” 6. The aforesaid judgment of this Court was assailed before the Apex Court by way of SLP(C) No.17052 of 2015, titled Kirti Rana and others vs. Vivek Garg and others, which was disposed of by the Apex Court vide order dated 1st July, 2015, the relevant extract of which has been extracted in Annexure P-8, letter issued by the Director, Medical Education and Research, Himachal Pradesh and is reproduced below: “respondent Nos.4 to 8 make a statement that following the time schedule fixed by this Court for making admission to medical institution, the State Government has already completed the process of admission for the Academic year 2015-16 and that whatever order is rendered by the Court can be applied for the future academic years. We appreciate such a stand made on behalf of the learned counsel for respondents Nos.4 to 8. Therefore, whatever admissions are made based on prospectus already issued shall be maintained for the Academic year 2015-16.” Emphasis supplied. 7. We appreciate such a stand made on behalf of the learned counsel for respondents Nos.4 to 8. Therefore, whatever admissions are made based on prospectus already issued shall be maintained for the Academic year 2015-16.” Emphasis supplied. 7. The above directions were passed, since the Apex Court, vide order dated 24th March, 2015, had already fixed the time schedule for admission to various medical/dental courses for the academic year 2015-16 in Writ Petition(C) No.76 of 2015, titled Ashish Ranjan and others vs. Union of India and others, whereby the cut off date was fixed as 10th June, 2015. 8. Thus, the purpose of the said direction was that no admission can be made to various medical/dental courses after the cut off date, which was 10th June, 2015. 9. Respondents have filed the reply and have rightly taken the objection that the petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court after the expiry of the time frame and that such a relief, if granted, would amount to breach of the direction passed by the Apex Court whereby it was held that no admission can be granted after the cut off date and, that too, at the cost of candidates who are higher in merit as compared to the petitioners. It is apt to reproduce paragraphs 8 and 9 of the reply hereunder: “8. That to make it clear, it is worthwhile to submit here that as on today there are in total seven (07) PG Degree seats of various specialties are lying vacant in both the Medical Colleges. The copy of vacancy position is annexed and marked as Annexure R-1 for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. Keeping in view the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment supra these vacant seats can neither be offered, changed or nor be allotted to any candidates after the last cut off date i.e. 10.6.2015 as fixed by the Hon’ble Apex Court as it evident from Annexure P-2 annexed with the petition as this act of admission process will amount to 4th round of counseling that is not permissible as per Hon’ble Apex Court judgment supra which bars any admission made after 10.6.2015. 9. That if at this juncture the plea of the petitioner is accepted/considered, this will amount to violation of Hon’ble Apex Court orders and thereby contempt of Hon’ble Court order/judgment dated 24.3.2015. 9. That if at this juncture the plea of the petitioner is accepted/considered, this will amount to violation of Hon’ble Apex Court orders and thereby contempt of Hon’ble Court order/judgment dated 24.3.2015. Further, it is submitted that if at this belated stage the plea of the petitioner is given weightage there is every possibility that the candidates who are higher in merit as compared to the petitioner, they might object to the change offered to the petitioner and whole issue may lead to various legal ramifications. It is also worthwhile to submit here that if any admission made at this belated stage, it will be absolute imprudent and there is a danger of de-recognition of institution by the Medical Council of India.” 10. The sum and substance of the above discussion is that no admission or change in specialty is permissible once the cut off date is over. One of us (Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice), as Judge of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, in OWP No.464 of 2007, titled Aadil Ashraf vs. Board of Professional Examination, J&K, reported in AIR J&K 2008, 75, while dealing with the analogous issue, has taken a similar view and held that no admission can be granted after cut off date. It is apt to reproduce paragraph 9 of the said decision hereunder: “9. Keeping in view the terms and conditions contained in the brochure and the judgments (supra), I am of the considered view that admission cannot be granted to the petitioner after cut of date.” 11. Having said so, the writ petitions are not maintainable and the same are dismissed as such alongwith pending CMPs, if any.