9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 137 - SC - Indian LawsAdmissions criteria of students - whether the College had agreed to admit students placed in the merit list or waiting list of RPMT-2008 into the 85% of 150 seats of the MBBS course approved by the Central Government - Held that - There is in fact no consensual arrangement between the College and the State or the University that the College will admit students from the merit list or wait list of RPMT-2008. The finding of the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court that there was such a consensual arrangement between the College and the State Government to admit students from the merit list or wait list of RPMT-2008 is, therefore, erroneous. Hence, the direction of the High Court to the College to consider and admit students from the merit list or wait-list of RPMT-2008 will have to be set aside. Whether the admissions of 117 students to the MBBS course of the College were within the fundamental right of the College? - Held that - While holding that a private unaided non-minority institution has the right to establish and administer an educational institution under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India also held that such right will include the right to admit students into the institution. Students seeking admission to a professional institution were required to be treated fairly and preferences were not to be shown to less meritorious but more influential students and greater emphasis was required to be laid on the merit of the students seeking admission determined for admission to professional colleges, by either the marks that the student obtains at the qualifying examination, or by a common entrance test conducted by the institution, or in the case of professional colleges, by government agencies. On examining the admission procedure adopted by the College for admitting the students to the MBBS seats for the academic year 2008-2009 the College has admitted 16 students from the list of candidates selected in the PC-PMT 2008 conducted by the Federation of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan who did not call for any applications from candidates for admission to the MBBS course, but only for the BDS course. Moreover, the College had not been included in the brochure published for PC-PMT 2008 conducted by the Federation of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan. Consequently, students, who may be interested not in the BDS course but in the MBBS course, could not have applied to take the PC-PMT 2008 conducted by the Federation of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan. As a result, many meritorious students desirous of taking admission in the MBBS course in the College could not get an opportunity to participate in the PC-PMT 2008 conducted by the Federation of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan. The admission procedure adopted by the College was thus not fair and transparent. Clause (2) of Regulation 5 on which the MCI relied upon clearly states that in States having more than one University/Board/Examining Body conducting the qualifying examination a competitive entrance examination should be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation as there may be variation of standards at qualifying examinations conducted by different agencies. As noted, it is not the case of the College that all students who applied pursuant to the advertisement had passed 10 2 Examinations conducted by one and the same University/Board/Examining Body. Hence, the merit of the students who had applied pursuant to the advertisement of the College had to be uniformly evaluated by a competitive entrance examination, but no such competitive entrance examination had been held by the College between all the candidates who had applied pursuant to the advertisement. Therefore, there was a clear violation of Clause (2) of Regulation 5 of the MCI Regulations in admitting the 101 students to the MBBS Course for the academic year 2008- 2009 by the College. The 117 students, who were admitted to the MBBS course, may not be at fault if the College did not hold a competitive entrance examination for determining the inter se merit of students who had applied to the College in the MBBS seats of the College, but they are beneficiaries of violation of clause (2) of Regulation 5 of the MCI Regulations by the College. They have got admission into the College without any proper evaluation of their merit vis the other students who had applied but had not been admitted in a competitive entrance examination. We, therefore, hold that each of the 117 students who have been admitted in the MBBS seats in the College will pay Rs.3 lacs to the State Government on account of their admission in violation of clause (2) of Regulation 5 of the MCI Regulations and the total amount received by the State Government from the 117 students will be spent for improvement of infrastructure and laboratories in the Government Medical Colleges of the State and for no other purpose. The directions in rem for strict compliance, without demur and default, by all concerned that the commencement of new courses or increases in seats of existing courses of MBBS/BDS are to be approved/recognised by the Government of India by 15th July of each calendar year for the relevant academic sessions of that year & Medical Council of India shall, immediately thereafter, issue appropriate directions and ensure the implementation and commencement of admission process within one week thereafter. After 15th July of each year, neither the Union of India nor the Medical or Dental Council of India shall issue any recognition or approval for the current academic year. If any such approval is granted after 15th July of any year, it shall only be operative for the next academic year and not in the current academic year. Once the sanction/approval is granted on or before 15th July of the relevant year, the name of that college and all seats shall be included in both the first and the second counseling, in accordance with the Rules. The admission to the medical or dental colleges shall be granted only through the respective entrance tests conducted by the competitive authority in the State or the body of the private colleges. All admissions through any of the stated selection processes have to be effected only after due publicity and in consonance with the directions issued by this Court. If any seats remain vacant or are surrendered from All India Quota, they should positively be allotted and admission granted strictly as per the merit by 15th September of the relevant year and not by holding an extended counseling.
Issues Involved:
1. Agreement on Admission Process 2. Fundamental Right to Admit Students 3. Compliance with MCI Regulations 4. Validity of Admissions 5. Penalty for Violation of Regulations Detailed Analysis: 1. Agreement on Admission Process: The first issue revolves around whether the College had agreed to admit students based on the Rajasthan Pre-Medical Test (RPMT-2008). The High Court found a consensual arrangement existed, but the College disputed this. The Supreme Court examined the meeting records and correspondence, concluding there was no consensual arrangement. The College had not consented to admit students from RPMT-2008 until it received necessary clearances. Therefore, the High Court's finding of a consensual arrangement was erroneous, and the direction to admit students from RPMT-2008 was set aside. 2. Fundamental Right to Admit Students: The College, being a private unaided professional institution, argued its fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to admit students. The Supreme Court referred to the judgments in T.M.A. Pai Foundation and P.A. Inamdar, which upheld the right of private unaided institutions to admit students, subject to the admission process being fair, transparent, and non-exploitative. The College's admission process, however, did not meet these criteria as it was not fair and transparent, thus falling short of the standards set in P.A. Inamdar. 3. Compliance with MCI Regulations: The College was bound to follow the Medical Council of India (MCI) Regulations while making admissions. Regulation 5 of the MCI Regulations mandates that admissions be based solely on merit, determined through a competitive entrance examination. The College admitted students based on their 10+2 marks without holding a competitive entrance examination, thus violating Regulation 5(2). The Supreme Court emphasized that the College must adhere to MCI Regulations, and the admission process must ensure uniform evaluation of merit. 4. Validity of Admissions: The Supreme Court acknowledged that the students admitted were not at fault and had fulfilled the eligibility criteria under Regulation 4 of the MCI Regulations. However, their admissions were in violation of Regulation 5(2). Citing precedents where the Court had allowed students to continue their courses despite irregular admissions, the Supreme Court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to allow the 117 students to continue their MBBS course, subject to each paying Rs. 3 lakhs to the State Government for infrastructure development in government medical colleges. 5. Penalty for Violation of Regulations: To deter future violations and ensure adherence to MCI Regulations, the Supreme Court imposed penalties on the College. The College was directed to surrender 107 MBBS seats in a phased manner, starting from the academic year 2012-2013. These seats would be filled by the State Government based on merit determined through RPMT or any other common entrance test. The College was also required to pay the same fees as government colleges for these seats. Conclusions: 1. No Agreement on RPMT Admissions: The College did not consent to admit students from RPMT-2008, and the High Court's finding of a consensual arrangement was incorrect. 2. Violation of Admission Procedures: The College's admission process did not meet the fair, transparent, and non-exploitative criteria, violating the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g). 3. Non-compliance with MCI Regulations: The College violated Regulation 5(2) by not holding a competitive entrance examination, thus failing to ensure uniform evaluation of merit. 4. Students' Admissions Upheld: The Supreme Court allowed the 117 students to continue their MBBS course, subject to payment of Rs. 3 lakhs each for infrastructure development. 5. Penalties Imposed: The College was directed to surrender 107 seats in a phased manner to the State Government for admission based on merit through RPMT or other common entrance tests.
|
