Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 894 (RAJ)

Abdul Rahman v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-03-15

ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. The instant writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to extend the benefit of reservation under ExS5 category as per allotment list dated 03.02.2022 and further, permit the petitioners to get admission in MBBS/BDS Course. The petitioners also prayed that the provisional allotment list of PwD and WDP candidates of Round-I dated 17.02.2022 and 18.02.2022 may be revised. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-(S.B.CWP No.3476/2022) submitted that father of the petitioner-Abdul Rahman was earlier working in the Indian Army and as such, due to disability attributed in service, he was discharged from service. 3. Learned counsel submitted that notification issued by the NEET Counselling Board-2021 provided 1% reservation on Horizontal basis to Defence Personnel (serving and retired) of Rajasthan Origin and Para Military Personnel (serving/retired) of Rajasthan Origin. 4. Learned counsel submitted that since father of the petitioner-Abdul Rahman was falling in ExS5 category and as such, provisional merit list was issued for counselling of Round-I and the petitioner-Abdul Rahman was shown at Serial No.40 and petitioner-Nikhil Choudhary was shown at Sr. No.38, in ExS5 Category. 5. Learned counsel submitted that the respondents, later on, issued another provisional list by revising earlier merit list and thereby, name of the petitioner was placed at Serial No.17. 6. Learned counsel submitted that the amended provisional combined merit list, which was issued again by the respondents on 15.02.2022 had asked the candidates to join the allotted College and the petitioners were confident that they were be allotted the Government College in ExS5 category, however, the respondents denied the eligibility of the petitioners to consider their case in ExS5 category and 1% reservation to Ex-Servicemen, has not been implemented in proper manner by the respondents. 7. This Court had asked learned counsel appearing for the respondents-NEET Counselling Board as what was the criteria, which was decided by them to bifurcate seats between two different categories, for which 1% seats were reserved as Defence Personnel and Para Military Personnel are made eligible for the said reservation of 1% seats in Government Colleges. 8. This Court, had asked learned counsel appearing for the respondents as whether any candidate falling in ExS5 Category, has been given admission, who has lower merit than the petitioners. 9. 8. This Court, had asked learned counsel appearing for the respondents as whether any candidate falling in ExS5 Category, has been given admission, who has lower merit than the petitioners. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents had initially prepared the merit list by assigning the different categories to the Wards of Defence Personnel, however, the same was not done as per the Standard of Procedure (SOP) dated 01.07.2020 and as such, when the writ petitions were filed before this Court, the respondents had decided to revise the merit list after strictly complying with the SOP dated 01.07.2020. 10. Learned counsel submitted that in the revised list, the candidates of ExS4 category were having better merit and priority and as such, admissions were granted to such candidates. 11. Learned counsel submitted that no person in EXS5 category lower than the petitioners in merit, has been given admission in Government Medical College. 12. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners in rejoinder have raised a grievance that a combined list of WDP and WPP has been prepared and as such, the petitioners now want consideration of their cases by drawing the separate merit list by excluding WPP candidates. 13. This Court asked learned counsel for the respondents- Mr.Harshal Tholia as what was the basis of prescribing the ratio of seats between the WDP/WPP categories. 14. Learned counsel for the respondents has filed an additional affidavit along-with the copy of the order dated 04.07.2012 issued by the State Government, wherein it has been decided that the ratio between the Defence Personnel and Para Military Personnel for allocation of seats in MBBS/BDS Course would be in 3:1. 15. This Court finds that no candidate in ExS5 category has been given admission and the candidates who were placed in ExS4 category have been considered for admission. 16. This Court further finds that 1% seats for WDP/WPP has also been reserved and as such, bifurcation has been provided by the State Government in a particular ratio and the same has been strictly followed. 17. This Court accordingly finds that the merit of the petitioners, if has been revised for the purpose of counselling, the same exercise has been undertaken by the State-respondents by complying with the SOP and further bifurcation of seats has also been done in the ratio, as prescribed by the State Government. 18. 17. This Court accordingly finds that the merit of the petitioners, if has been revised for the purpose of counselling, the same exercise has been undertaken by the State-respondents by complying with the SOP and further bifurcation of seats has also been done in the ratio, as prescribed by the State Government. 18. This Court, does not find any illegality in the exercise carried out by the respondents and as such, this Court is not inclined to accept the writ petitions filed by the petitioners and same are accordingly dismissed. 19. A copy of this order be placed in each petition.