Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 82 (RAJ)

Adhiraj Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2020-01-08

ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

body2020
ORDER : Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. 1. Though these matters come up on the applications filed under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 72/2020 and another application filed by the petitioners in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 27775/2018 for permitting the petitioners to appear in the Theory Examination of MBBS III Professional Part-II, but this order would dispose of both the writ petitions, with the consent of both the counsel for the parties, by this common order. 2. This Court on 3.1.2020 kept in mind the order passed by Coordinate Bench in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 27775/2018 (Pawan Kumar Yadav v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) dated 13.12.2019, and directed the respondent-University to accept the examination forms of the petitioners of MBBS III Professional Examination Part-II and petitioners were further permitted to participate in the ensuing examination to be commenced on 09.01.2020. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B.C.W.P. No. 27775/2018, had heard counsel for both the parties and initially an order dated 20.05.2019 was passed and direction was given to complete the practical examination of the petitioners of MBBS III Professional Part-I as they had to appear in Theory Examination from 03.06.2019 to 15.06.2019. 4. Learned counsel further informed that subsequently on 13.12.2019 Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B.C.W.P. No. 27775/2018 passed an order after hearing counsel for both the parties and directed the respondent-University to accept the examination forms of the petitioners for MBBS III Year Professional Part-II (Main Examination) January, 2020 and filling of examination forms was not to create any equity in favour of the petitioners to undertake the examination scheduled in the second week of January, 2020. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners are eligible to appear in the III Year Professional Part-II Examination as the petitioners have already passed Part-I of III Year Examination and they have also attended the requisite classes having their attendance of 75% to make them eligible to appear in the examination. 6. Mr. Saransh Saini and Mr. 6. Mr. Saransh Saini and Mr. Aniroodh Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that discrimination is being meted out to the petitioners by not allowing them to appear in the examination and the candidates of 2015 Batch who have yet to complete their Training Programme of 9th Semester (Regular Batch) are being allowed to write examination and petitioners are denied the same right. 7. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the students of 9th Semester (Regular Batch) of 2015 will complete their Training Programme on 01.05.2020 in SMS Medical College, Jaipur, in Udaipur on 07.04.2020 and in Ajmer on 11.03.2020. 8. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are wrongly deprived to participate in the Examination Process and even if the petitioners' Training Programme of 9th Semester is going to be completed somewhere in the month of June, 2020, the petitioners should not be denied to appear in the examination. Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that relevant Ordinance of the University i.e. 265(viii)(c) entitles the petitioners to write their examination. 9. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already passed III Year Professional Part-I Examination and they were eligible for III Year Professional Part-II Examination and as such insistence of the University to undergo one year training cannot be made applicable in the present facts of the case. 10. Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that on 31.01.2017, a decision was taken in respect of MBBS Remanded Students and after participation of Controller of Examination, RUHS, Jaipur it was decided that the students who had failed in First MBBS Examination their supplementary examination for First Professional Examination was to be conducted and result was to be declared within approximately three months and supplementary practical examination was to be conducted within 15 days for completion of supplementary theory examination. 11. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that it was further decided in the said meeting that the Remanded Batch of First MBBS was to be merged with the Main Batch after passing supplementary examination. 12. 11. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that it was further decided in the said meeting that the Remanded Batch of First MBBS was to be merged with the Main Batch after passing supplementary examination. 12. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the decision of High Power Committee, the petitioners were required to be taken with the Main Batch of the Year 2015 and once the petitioners passed supplementary examination and they have passed Second Year (3rd, 4th & 5th Semester), the petitioners cannot be discriminated in the matter of their right to appear in the ensuing examination. 13. Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that Rajasthan University Health Sciences (RUHS) itself had decided by writing a letter to the different Medical Colleges vide letter dated 05.12.2018 that the candidates who had appeared in Supplementary Examination, 2016, their forms may be available on Portal and their right to appear in the examination will be later-on informed to the different colleges. 14. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the RUHS has taken a conscious decision to permit the students by making the form available on the Portal of the RUHS and as such now University cannot take a U-turn denying the petitioners from appearing in the examination. 15. Mr. M.A. Khan, Adv. appearing for the respondent-University submitted that the interim order passed by this Court in fact confers undue right in favour of the petitioners dehors the provisions of Medical Council of India, Regulations as well as Ordinance framed by the University for regulating the admissions and examination. 16. Learned counsel Mr. M.A. Khan, submitted that duration of MBBS course is 4.5 years followed by one year compulsory rotating internship. Learned counsel submitted that course/study of MBBS is imparted in nine semesters of six months each in three phases i.e. 1st Phase-Semester Nos. 1 and 2, 2nd Phase-Semester Nos. 3, 4 and 5, 3rd Phase-Part-I-Semester No. 6 and 7 and 3rd Phase-Part-II-Semester Nos. 8 and 9. 17. Learned counsel Mr. M.A. Khan submitted that the petitioners had appeared in MBBS Phase-I Examinations held in August, 2016, result was declared on 22.10.2016 and petitioner did not pass in this examination. 18. Learned counsel Mr. M.A. Khan has submitted that MBBS (Main Batch) Examination, 2015 was conducted for 1st MBBS in August, 2016, 2nd MBBS in Feb, 2018 and 3rd MBBS Part-I in January, 2019. 19. 18. Learned counsel Mr. M.A. Khan has submitted that MBBS (Main Batch) Examination, 2015 was conducted for 1st MBBS in August, 2016, 2nd MBBS in Feb, 2018 and 3rd MBBS Part-I in January, 2019. 19. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners did not pass the First MBBS Examination, 2016, they appeared in First MBBS Supplementary Examination held in January, 2017 and they have been declared pass when result was declared on 3.3.2017. Second MBBS Examination was held of the petitioners in June, 2018 and result was declared on 31.8.2018 and examination of 3rd MBBS Part-I was held in June, 2019 and as such the petitioners can become eligible for 3rd MBBS Part-II in June, 2020. 20. Learned counsel further submitted that the student after passing III Professional MBBS Part-I Examination, has to pursue study for twelve months i.e. two semesters 8th and 9th and only then he becomes eligible to appear in III Professional MBBS Part-II Examination. Since the petitioners have not completed study of 9th semester and as such they are not eligible. 21. Mr. M.A. Khan submitted that MCI Regulations mandates to undergo requisite period of study to appear in the examination and similar provision has been made in the Ordinance of the University. 22. Learned counsel further submits that as per Ordinance 272 of University of Rajasthan as adopted by RUHS, the training period, time distribution and duration of course is provided and as such Clause (viii) under the head of "Training Period and Time Distribution/Duration of Course" as per sub clause (a), it specifically provides that passing in first professional is compulsory before proceeding to phase second training. 23. Counsel for the respondent-University submitted that the petitioners admittedly have not completed their minimum 6 months Training in 9th Semester of III Year MBBS and without undergoing the said period of 6 months training, the petitioners cannot be permitted to appear in the examination. 24. Counsel for the respondent-University further submitted that the Medical Council of India has laid down the statutory regulations regulating the admission and duration of course and no dilution can be permitted by any Authority and as such even if some decision was taken at one point of time in 2017, the same does not mean that the requirement of undergoing the statutory period of training can be dispensed with. 25. 25. Learned counsel for the respondent-University further submitted that the petitioners cannot be permitted to claim parity with other candidates of 2015 (Main Batch) of MBBS as these students had appeared in the examination conducting for III Year Part-I MBBS Examination conducted in the January, 2019 and since they have completed one year period and petitioners admittedly have appeared in the said examination in June, 2019 and as such they would complete one year in 2020 and as such the petitioners cannot be permitted to appear in the examination. 26. Learned counsel for the respondent-University also places reliance on a judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rakesh Gurjar & Others vs. State of Rajasthan & Others, dated 28.1.2013 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 831/2013 and other connected petitions. 27. Learned counsel on the strength of the said judgment submitted that this Court has considered the scope of Ordinance 268(b) and has taken a view that the mandatory period of 18 months cannot be shortened or candidates cannot be permitted to appear in the examination. 28. Learned counsel Mr. Saransh Saini appearing for the petitioners in rejoinder has submitted that the University Authorities are adopting different parameters for conducting the examination as candidates who will complete the training of 9th Semester in the month of May, 2019 are permitted in January, 2020 itself and the petitioners will be loosing atleast their one year on account of not being permitted to appear in the ensuing examination. 29. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 30. This Court finds that the petitioners who are of the remand batch have to attend their classes from the first week of January, 2020 and minimum six months period is required to undergo the said classes. 31. This Court further finds that without completing the full course of study for the entire semesters, permitting the students to appear in the examination would be in violation of the Ordinance as well as the mandatory requirement of MCI. 32. 31. This Court further finds that without completing the full course of study for the entire semesters, permitting the students to appear in the examination would be in violation of the Ordinance as well as the mandatory requirement of MCI. 32. This Court finds that the respondent-University has kept in mind the time schedule of conducting the examination as per requirement of the Ordinance and the candidates who are from the Main Batch of year 2015 have already undergone the required period of their training and have also taken examination in the January, 2019 and having spent one year of their training, such candidates are entitled to appear in the ensuing examination which is conducted during the time prescribed for completing the 9th Semester. 33. Learned counsel for the petitioner in the last submitted that all the petitioners have deposited their examination fees with the University as per direction given by this Court and as such if they are not allowed to appear in the examination, at least, their fee which has been paid to the University, may be either refunded or if the petitioners are permitted to appear in the next examination, the same fee should be adjusted. 34. Mr. M.A. Khan learned counsel for the respondent-University submitted that the University has no hesitation in refunding the fees to the petitioners, since they are not being allowed to appear in the examination and their fees will be refunded to the petitioners. 35. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Saransh Saini, at this juncture, submitted that grievances of the petitioners are also with respect to the mentioning in the mark-sheet of the petitioners as "Remand Batch" and every time the petitioners would have to suffer scar of 'remand batch'. 36. Mr. M.A. Khan learned counsel submitted that University does not intend to put any kind of 'remand' word while issuing the final mark-sheets to the students and same will not reflect on their any batch being taken as remand batch for the purpose of their mark-sheet and other documents which are issued by the University, in future. 37. Accordingly, the present writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 38. A copy of this order be placed in connected petition.