P.P. Kannan and Others vs The Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Dept. and Govt. of Tamil Nadu, The Director of Medical Education and The Secretary, Selection Committee for Medical Post Graduate Studies-1998-99

S.S. Subramani, J.—In all these writ petitions, the Petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to

the Prospectus 1998-99 for admission to Post Graduate Courses and the consequent Notification in Ref. No. DIPR/218/DIS/98 dated 25.2.1998

issued by the first Respondent and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary in so far as the provisions of Sub-clause (2) of Clause 4 of the said

Notification and consequently to direct the Respondents to permit the Petitioners to apply for the Post-Graduate courses and to appear for the

Entrance Examination to be held on 18.4.1998 or any subsequent date.

In W.P.3735 of 1998, the learned Judge granted interim relief permitting the Petitioners therein to sit for the examination at their own risk and

the learned Judge also directed that the writing of examination alone will not create any right or equity in their favour and has further made it clear

that the results will not be declared and it would be subject to the decision of the writ petition. When such interim orders are passed, the

Respondents wanted the interim direction to be vacated. In the meanwhile, other Petitioners also came to this Court seeking the same relief. The

same was opposed by the Respondents.

Under these circumstances, though the Petitioners want now only an interim direction, it was thought of to dispose of the main writ petitions on

merits.

Impugned Notification, Clause 4 challenged is regarding the eligibility to apply for the Entrance Examinations to the Post Graduate courses.

Clause 4(2) says that the candidates applying for the course should have completed C.R.R.I, on the date of Entrance Examination and the date of

Entrance Examination for Post Graduate Degree/diploma M. Ch. neurosurgery (5 years) courses will be on 18.4.1998 (Saturday) and for M.D.S.

course on 19.4.1998 (Sunday).

This clause, according to the Petitioner, goes against the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr. Dinesh Kumar and Ors. v. Motilal Nehru

Medical College, Allahabad and Ors. 1986 3 SCJ 266. Reliance is placed on by the counsel on paragraph 12 of the said judgment. He has also

relied on Clause (3) of paragraph 12 of the said decision.

In view of the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, it is contended that asking the Petitioners to wait for one year after their completing the

MBBS course would put them to hardship and it is further stated that there is no justification in asking the students that they should complete the

C.R.R.I. course when they just completed the M.B.B.S. examination, the subject which they studied will be fresh in their mind and it will be easy

for them to write the entrance examination. It is their case that before the P.G. course begins, they would be completing the course which will make

them eligible for undergoing the P.G. course. There is no purpose to be achieved in prohibiting the candidate to sit for the examination after a

period of one year.

As against the said contention, Respondent submitted that the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court may not have any application for the

present cases. It is stated that it is a case where an Entrance Examination is conducted throughout India. Candidates throughout India are

appearing for examination. The examinations are conducted on various dates and it could apply only when no convenient dates could be fixed. The

impugned notification applies only to the State of Tamil Nadu where they are not conducting All India Entrance Examination. The cut-off date

applies to all and so long as the same is not challenged the writ petition is not maintainable.

It is further contended that in the Prospectus one of the conditions for eligibility is completion of C.R.R.I. When that qualification is not

questioned, whether that should be before the cut-off date or afterwards, is a matter for the Respondent to decide.

The learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that successful completion of C.R.R.I. is required and what they want is that this could be

completed after they sit for examination. It is submitted that fixing the qualification is with the Government or with the Respondents and the same

cannot be questioned. The present writ petitions are, therefore, not maintainable.

It is also brought to my notice that challenging the very same Clause writ petitions were filed and a learned Judge of this Court dismissed the

same and it was held that the Government has power to fix qualification. The decision was upheld by the Division Bench also. In that case, the

Division Bench, after giving reasons permitted the Petitioner therein to move a representation. It is, therefore, submitted that when the Division

Bench itself has upheld Clause 4, this Court should not take a different view. Various other, decisions were also brought to my notice to contend

that it is for the Government to fix the cut-off date and the qualification for writing examinations.

After having considered the rival contentions, I feel that the contention of the Respondent has to be accepted. As rightly contended by the

counsel for the Respondent, nowhere in the writ petition, the right of the Government or of the Respondent to fix the qualification or the cut-off

date is challenged. Naturally, it is for them to decide when the qualification is to be obtained. The Petitioners cannot contend that they must be

permitted to obtain the qualification after writing the examination.

As I said, the only contention that was raised is on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court. It was contended that the decision of the

Supreme Court was not brought to the notice of the learned Judges of the Division Bench. But, I do not think that the decision of the Supreme

Court may have any application to the facts of this case. It is true that certain directions are given to the All India Medical Council regarding fixing

of qualification. But, it is clear from the last portion of Clause 3 of paragraph 12 that it is a matter which has to be decided in consultation with the

All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Medical Council of India. In this case, we are concerned only with the Medical Colleges that are

situated within the State of Tamil Nadu and the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court may not have any application.

It must also be noted that the Division Bench dismissed the appeal questioning the very same clause. The learned Judges held that there is no

merit and they did not find any ground to quash the clause. I cannot think that the Division Bench was not aware of the decision of the Hon''ble

Supreme Court.

It was also brought to my notice that some candidates who are Petitioners have not even applied for the said course. Even without any

application, they seek permission to write the examination.

Under the above circumstances, I am of the view that none of the Petitioners are entitled to any relief. The writ petitions are dismissed.

Consequently, the interim applications are also dismissed. W.P.3735 of 1998 also stands dismissed. No costs.