Rajarshi Sen vs State Of Tripura And Ors

Heard Mr. K Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. AK Bhowmik, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. K De, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3.

As per direction of this court, the records have been produced by the Director of Medical Education, Government of Tripura.

The grievance of the petitioner, in this writ petition, is that the respondents No. 4 & 5 have been shown as the candidates from the OBC category in the result sheet published by the NEET-PG 2020 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition). Because of this entry, the petitioner perceives that the respondents No.4 & 5 are not in the category of General EWS whereas the petitioner is shown in the said category. Thus, on the basis of merit he is entitled to the PG seat but that was denied to him and the respondents No. 4 has been given the PG seat having due regard to the seat matrix of the Tripura State - PG (MD/MS).

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has urged this court that the nomination that has been issued vide the notification dated 01.05.2020 by the Director of Medical Education, be set aside. It has been further urged that the nomination of the respondent No.4 against the seat reserved for Economically Weaker Section [UR-EWS] be set aside and the state-respondents be directed not to treat the respondents No. 4 & 5 as the candidates from the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) and only to treat them as OBC candidates.

Mr. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in the common merit list six candidates belonging to the Tripura EWS figure and their scores are shown in a tabular form below:

Registered Candidates State Rank

Roll No.

Category

NEET Score

Incentive Marks

Total Marks

4

2066000026

Tripura/EW

750

-

750.00

10

2066000139

Tripura/EW

719

-

719.00

15

2066000192

Tripura/EW

700

-

700.00

20

2066000108

Tripura/EW

684

-

684.00

50

2066140741

Tripura/EW

567

-

567.00

99

2066114087

Tripura/EW

467

-

467.00

The person having the Roll No. 2066114087 is the petitioner and in the said category he secured the lowest marks (467.00) whereas the respondent No.4 has secured 750.00 marks and accordingly, Mr. Bhowmik, learned Advocate General has submitted that considering the merit, the respondent No.4 has been given the nomination and not the petitioner. According to him, there has not been any discrimination. Fairness has been maintained strictly and the order of merit has been followed in the category for which the nomination is concerned.

Mr. Nath, learned counsel has repeated that a person whose merit position has been shown in the category of OBC cannot be brought under the UR-EWS category.

From the records, this Court finds that both the respondents No.4 & 5 belong to the General EWS category and the Income and Asset Certificate to be produced by Economically Weaker Sections has been produced by each of the respondents No. 4 & 5. The certificate has been submitted by the petitioner to claim selection under UR-EWS. Having observed thus, this Court does not find any basis of excluding the respondents No.4 & 5 to be considered under the General EWS category on the basis of their merit.

Mr. Bhowmik, learned Advocate General has apprised this Court that the respondent No.4 has already surrendered her nomination for a better seat in some other institution of repute and as such there is a possibility of second counselling in which the petitioner may get a chance to be nominated in one of the PG seats allotted for General EWS candidates.

The writ petition, being bereft of merit stands dismissed.

However, the respondents shall allow the petitioner in the counseling and strictly according to the merit in the said category, the nomination be made.

There shall be no order as to costs.