1
2008 (13) SCALE 102
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6026 OF 2008
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 17406 of 2006)
State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Appellant(s)
Versus
Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal & Ors. .... Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO.6027 2008
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 17832 of 2006)
JUDGMENT
P. Sathasivam, J.
Leave granted in both SLPs.
C.A. No.6026/2008 @ S.L.P.(C) No. 17406/2006
1. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment and final order dated 28.9.2006 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, in Writ Petition No. 4515 of 2006, whereby the High Court allowed the said writ petition directing the State - Directorate of Medical Education and Research (hereinafter referred to as "DMER") to consider Sneha Satyanarayan
Agrawal - respondent No.1 herein for giving seat in Indira Gandhi Medical College (hereinafter referred to as "IGMC"), Nagpur by shifting Kirti Shivajirao Ruikar-respondent No.2 herein to Government Medical College (hereinafter referred to as "GMC"), Yavatmal.
2) The facts, in brief, are as under:
On 31.03.2006, Information Brochure for medical courses in Government Colleges in Maharashtra for the academic year 2006-2007 was published and accordingly MHT-CET, 2006 was conducted on 21.05.2006 throughout Maharashtra. First round for verification of documents and filling of preference forms took place during 28.6.2006 to 6.7.2006 and accordingly, on the basis of the same, final allotments were made on 14.7.2006 thereby mentioning 21.7.2006 as the last date for joining. In the first round, admissions were given as under :
State Name of Student Name of the College Quota
Merit
List
No.
963 Sneha Satyanarayan Shri Vasantrao Naik Govt. 70%
Agrawal Respondent No.1 Medical College, Yavatmal Regional
869 Kirti Shivajirao Ruikar Shri Vasantrao Naik Govt. 30%
Respondent No.2 Medical College, Yavatmal
State
844 Deepika Nandkumar Mishra Govt. Medical College, 30%
Respondent No.3 Miraj State
In IGMC, Nagpur, twelve seats for women open category were vacant, and as per the Rule, 30% seats have to be filled up from State and 70% seats have to be filled up from Region i.e. four seats from State and eight seats from Region have to be filled up. On 24.8.2006, in the second round of counseling, considering vacant seats and the preference as given by the candidates in the Preference Form, two candidates, namely, 1) Purbi Rabindra Acharya (SML No.634)who was admitted in Indira Gandhi Medical College, Nagpur in 30% State quota, preferred and joined B.J. Medical College, Pune and 2) Anuradha Kamalkishore Rathi (SML No. 703) who was also admitted in India Gandhi Medical College, Nagpur in 30% State quota preferred and joined Government Medical College, Nagpur. Therefore, two seats in 30% State quota were vacant. Accordingly, Deepika Mishra, SML No. 844 and Kirti Ruikar, SML No. 869 were given admission against the vacant seats. In view of the same, seats in their earlier places were vacant and two candidates were accommodated. Second round of admissions was finalized on 24.8.2006 and the list was published on 25.8.2006 mentioning 30.8.2006 as the last date for joining. On 28.8.2006, respondent No.1 herein submitted a representation to DMER by fax informing that the admissions of respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are in violation of Rules depriving her to exercise her higher preference and betterment. However, no action was taken. Being aggrieved by the conduct of the Government, respondent No.1 approached the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench by filing a writ petition. On 15.9.2006, respondent No.1 herein filed an application impleading Deepika Mishra as a party respondent and the same was allowed. On 28.9.2006, after hearing the parties, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, by pronouncing only operative part of the judgment, thereby directing DMER to consider shifting of Kirti Ruikar from Indira Gandhi Medical College, Nagpur to GMC, Yavatmal and shifting of Sneha Agrawal, respondent No.1 herein from GMC, Yavatmal to Indira Gandhi Medical College, Nagpur. Later on, on 12.10.2006, full judgment was delivered.In the meantime, the entire admission process was over. Challenging the judgment dated 28.9.2006, the State of Mahrashtra has filed the present appeal by way of special leave petition before this Court.
Civil Appeal No.6027/2008 @ S.L.P.(c) No. 17832 of 2006
3. This appeal has been filed by respondent No.1 in S.L.P. (C) No. 17406 of 2006 against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, dated 28.9.2006 in Writ Petition No. 4515 of 2006 challenging the judgment on the ground that the High Court has not issued any direction to correct the error committed by the respondents.
4. Heard Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellants and Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents.
5. The contention of the first respondent herein, before the High Court, was that while preparing merit list of the second round of IGMC Women Category candidates, first four seats must go to the 30% category and next eight seats must go to the 70% category i.e., State List and Regional List respectively. It was also her claim that in terms of Rule 2.3.1 of Information Brochure of Preference System for admission to Health Science Courses of MHT-CET, 2006 published by the Directorate of Medical Education and Research, this pattern has to be followed in each round while filling up seats in any College/Institute. It was her further claim that every vacant seat is required to be filled in on the basis of the merit and the preference taken together and no single factor can be operated at any point of time i.e., at any later round. It was also the claim of the first respondent that while considering the preference for betterment, the seats meant for 30% quota and 70% quota cannot either way be altered and the seats meant for 30% quota must be filled up according to merit depending on the preference from that category only.
6. On the other hand, it was the claim of the Competent Authority that the procedure carved out by the Directorate of Medical Education and Research in the Information Brochure of Preference System for admission to Health Science Courses MHT-CET, 2006 has been strictly followed and it was followed from the very beginning. The Authority also denied the contention of the writ petitioner first respondent herein, that there was any deviation from the rules which is part and parcel of the procedure for admission to MHT-CET, 2006.
7. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is useful to refer the Information Brochure of Preference System for admission to Health Science Courses(MBBS/BDS/BAMS/BUMS/ BPTh/BOTh/BASLP/BP&O/ B.Sc.[Nursing])MHT-CET-2006 issued by the Directorate of Medical Education and Research, Government of Mahrashtra. Among the various Rules, the following rules are relevant in the present case:
"1.4 DISTRIBUTION OF SEATS TO BE ALLOTTED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
1.4.1 After excluding the seats as provided in Para 1.2 and 1.3; the remaining seats will be at the disposal at the Competent Authority & available for candidates of the State for Selection in the following manner.
1.4.2 Out of the seats at the disposal of the Competent Authority, 30% of such seats in Colleges will be made available for candidates from the State and these seats will be filled on the basis of State Merit List. There will be constitutional, specified and female reservations in these seats as per rules.
1.4.3 The seats for BUMS, BPTh, BOTh, BASLP, BP&O and B.Sc. (Nursing) courses will be filled by the candidates from the State Level Merit List only.
1.4.4 Distribution of Seats in 70% Category After the exclusion of State Level seats mentioned at Para 1.4.2 the remaining 70% seats will be filled from amongst the Candidates who have passed HSC (or equivalent examination) from the Schools/Colleges situated in the region of the concerned Development Board i.e. Rest of Maharashtra, Vidarbha and Marathwada. There will be constitutional, specified and female reservations for these seats as per rules.
1.6 RESERVATION FOR FEMALE CANDIDATES:
30% seats at the disposal of the Competent Authority shall
be reserved for female candidates in all the courses. This
reservation shall be for all the categories like SC, ST, VJ,
NT-1, NT-2, NT-3, OBC, Common, HA, PH & DEF. 30% female reservation shall be provided in 30% State seats & 70% regional seats of that category. If requisite number of
female candidates are not available then these seats shall
be offered to male candidates of that category.
2. SELECTION PROCESS:
2.1 The selection will be made on the basis of preferences given
by the candidates. Only a limited number of meritorious
candidates will be called for Counselling and asked to fill the preference form. Counselling sessions are not meant for
instant seat allocation at these offices. During these
sessions candidates are helped in exercising their preferences for various courses, and the institutions. Seat allocation shall be made centrally at a later date on the basis of MHT-CET-2006 merit list and preferences exercised by
the candidates.
2.2 Selection Process shall be as follows:
The preference form shall be available at the office of the Regional Centre as per notified schedule. The duly filled preference form should be submitted at the same office.
Xxx xxx xxxx
2.2.3 The candidates may kindly note while filling the preference
form that MHT-CET-2006 merit list will be operated from
SML number 1 onwards in each round of selection. The candidate getting selected in previous round will be considered for betterment in the subsequent round. The betterment herein means the higher preference exercised by the candidate. The Shift in such betterment shall be compulsory and mandatory except for those who have filled `Status Retention Form.' Such a candidate who has filled Status Retention form will not be considered for any subsequent rounds of selection process for the year 2006-2007. The last date for filing Status Retention Form will be notified along with the selection list.
2.3.1 While filling the seats for any college/Institution state
Seats (30%) shall be filled first followed by regional seats (70%). The seats for the MKB shall be available as per state merit list only. The seats for Defence category shall be allotted region-wise.
2.6 Seats that have arisen or fallen vacant after the first round
shall be made available at the second round of selection on the basis of preference form already submitted. No new preference form will be required for any subsequent round(s). The vacancy position will be made available on website of DMER i.e. www.dmer.gov.in before commencement of the next round."
In the counter affidavit as well as written notes, the Competent Authority the Director of Medical Education and Research, Mumbai asserted before the High Court that it has strictly carried out the entire admission process in accordance with the above-mentioned Rules and also placed before the High Court the first and the second list of selection as well as the list of vacancies arising in various colleges after the first round and those who are filled up in the second round and also placed on record the preference forms of the writ petitioner, respondent No.3 as well as candidate at Serial Nos. 9 & 10 in the list of IGMC, Nagpur. We have carefully scrutinized the relevant documents in the light of the Rules applicable to issue in question. It is clear that the seats as per Rule 1.4 are to be distributed by the Competent Authority except the seat relating to nominees of the Government of India and of AIEE quota. As per the said Rule, the Competent Authority, out of the seats at its disposal, is required to make available 30% seats in the colleges for the candidates from the State and these seats are to be filled up on the basis of State Merit List. The Competent
Authority is also expected to fill up 70% seats from the candidates who have passed HSSC or equivalent examination from Schools/Colleges situated in (A)rest of Maharashtra (R),(B) Vidarbha (V) and (C) Marathwada(M). It is pertinent to mention that any candidate in the State of Maharashtra is entitled to compete in the MHT-CET-2006 and claim the seat from 30% quota. 70% quota is meant for candidates coming from the respective regions and the objective of this distribution is to see that regional candidates get their share in the admission process in their respective regions. As explained by learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, a candidate is not categorized either in 30% or 70% but the seats are categorized as 30% meant for all the candidates and 70% meant for regional candidates only. The concept of 30% and 70% is followed as provided in Rule 2.3.1 wherein while starting filling up of seats in any 1 institution/college 30% seats belonging to State quota should be filled in first followed by 70% regional seats which should be done on the basis of the State Merit List. A candidate with the higher number of marks is placed at Serial No.1 and the merit list goes in a descending fashion. Information Brochure shows that the candidates, at the time of their application, are required to fill in the Preference Form and may give as much as 52 preferences in the allotted colleges. While giving preference, the candidate selects colleges on the basis of its status and reputation and the choices are irrespective of the area or region where the college is situated. As per Rule 2.2.2, the selection will be on the basis of merit and the preferences submitted by the candidates in their Preference Form. It also contemplates that there shall be two or more rounds of selection process, depending on the availability of vacant seats. It is demonstrated before us that by keeping this method in mind, the Competent Authority published first list of students selected for Health Science Course through MHT-CET-2006. The information furnished by the Competent Authority shows that it had 2060 seats available for MBBS Course, out of which 307 and 15 seats are for All India quota and Government of India nominee respectively. The Competent Authority, therefore, has 1738 seats at its disposal for MBBS Course. It further shows that this number will increase if out of All India quota the seats are surrendered to be calculated in 30% State quota and if any seats from Government of India nominee are surrendered to be calculated in 70% Regional