9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves the residency requirement for admission to Post-graduate courses in Medicine and MDS at Goa Medical Colleges under the 1998 Rules, and the interpretation of Rule III(1)(iii) of the Goa Rules 1998. Residency Requirement Issue: The High Court allowed the first respondent's claim, considering the residency requirement in Rule III(1)(iii) as directory, dispensing with the ten years residency eligibility for selection of candidates for Post-graduate courses. The Supreme Court clarified that residency criteria cannot be disregarded for admission based solely on merit, emphasizing that domicile or residence preference is acceptable within reasonable limits. The Court upheld the validity of Rule III(1)(iii) of the Goa Rules 1998, stating that it is not merely directory but binding and mandatory for selection of candidates. Interpretation of Section 58 Issue: The first respondent relied on Section 58 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act, 1987, claiming entitlement to admission based on residency in the former Union Territory of Daman and Diu. The Supreme Court accepted this argument, interpreting "technical institutions" to include medical colleges, and extended the provision to ensure facilities for residents of the former Union Territory even after separation. The Court found a parallel with Section 113 of the States Re-organization Act, 1956, emphasizing the protective nature of Section 58 and the legislative intent to continue facilities for institutions like medical colleges. Consequently, the Court allowed the first respondent's application for admission based on the residency criteria. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal to clarify the legal position on the validity of Rule III(1)(iii) of the Goa Rules 1998, upholding its enforceability. The first respondent was granted admission for the course starting in September 2001, based on the residency requirements. No costs were awarded in the matter.
|
