Dr. Arpita Gupta vs MCI and Others

Ajay Rastogi, J.—The petitioner who is holding degree of MBBS from NIMS Medical College, Jaipur appeared in All India Pre PG Entrance Examination 2012 and got his merit position no. 9378 and was allotted MS Anatomy in second round of counseling in Govt. Medical College, Kota and after third round of counseling he was allotted MS Anatomy, SMS Medical College, Jaipur on 12.6.2012 where he joined and remaining seats which remain unfilled were surrendered to the State and have been filled on the basis of selection in state Pre PG 2012. Grievance of the petitioner is that MD Radio Diagnosis was one of his choice/preference for all five govt. medical college of the State but at later stage he came across with the statement of vacant seats available in RNT Medical College, Udaipur as on 26.6.2012 and it was mentioned that MD Radio Diagnosis at RNT Medical College was not allotted which was one of his choice and immediately he rushed to this Court by filing instant petition raising grievance that when MD Radio Diagnosis was one of his choice was not allotted at any stage he was entitled to be considered for allotment as per her order of merit.

It is not disputed that the seats allotted to her in second counseling was MS Anatomy at Kota and in third counseling at Jaipur where she joined but she intends to be considered as per merit cum choice for allotment of seat of MD Radio Diagnosis at RNT Medical College, Udaipur.

After notice of the present petition came to be served, reply has been separately filed by the respondent no. 2 and also by respondent no. 5 and as regard reply filed by respondent no. 2 it has been averred in para no. 7 that seats were allotted to the candidates as per their order of merit cum preference and according to the petitioner''s merit and preference she was allotted MS Anatomy in the second counseling and third counseling she was allotted MS Anatomy at SMS Medical College, Jaipur where she joined and all remaining seats which remain unfilled for any other good reasons were surrendered to the State quota on 22.6.2012 for filling up the same at their level as per their merit.

Counsel Mr. Raghav submits that after seats being surrendered to the State at least no further admission could be made of such of the candidates who participated in All India Pre PG Examination 2012 and in their reply it has been averred that after seats being surrendered the same were to be filled by the State quota amongst those who participated in State Pre Medical Examination 2012 as per their merit.

Mr. Khan has informed this Court that the seats which were surrendered by the Central Pre Pg Admission Board to the State quota have been filled and MD Radio Diagnosis at Udaipur RNT Medical College against which the petitioner has grievance has been filled and at least in absence of person who is going to be affected has to be heard in absence whereof relief to the petitioner even if find some justification is not sustainable.

It has also been informed that as per direction of Apex Court no admission could be made in Post Graduate Course after 30th September of the year.

Counsel for petitioner submits that she has a preferential claim to seek admission on the basis of merit in All India Pre PG Examination 2012 in Radio Diagnosis at RNT Medical College, Udaipur which was one of her preference and if any wrong has been committed by the respondent at least she could not be called upon to pay the price for it.

From the document which has been placed on record indicating the statement of vacant seats on 26.6.2012 there is a note that MD Radio Diagnosis 1 (Not Allotted) but no inference at this stage could be drawn that it was never considered for grant of admission. However, it is not the case of the petitioner that any person who was lower in merit has been considered for admission for Radio Diagnosis and after the seats remained vacant or unfilled it was surrendered to the State quota which has been rightly filled as per state quota and under these facts and circumstances, what is being prayed for cannot be granted to her.

Consequently, the writ petition being devoid of merit stands dismissed.

Counsel for petitioner has also prayed that heavy cost may be imposed upon the respondent for inaction on their part. This Court does not find any deliberate inaction which could call upon for imposing cost upon the respondents in regard to discharge of their duties. Consequently, prayer for imposing cost stands rejected.