LexBHAWNA GARG & ANR. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012] 10 S.C.R. 512 BHAWNA GARG & ANR. v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 6304-6305 of 2012) SEPTEMBER 5, 2012 [A.K. PATNAIK AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Education/Educational Institutions - Admission - To MBBS course - In three medical colleges - In one of the C colleges (LHMC) only female candidates were to be admitted - Admission to be on the basis of Delhi University Medical and Dental Entrance Test (DUMET) - 15% seats to be filled directly on the basis of CBSE examination - 36 seats (30 in the college LHMC and 6 in another) reserved for Nominees o of Government (NGO/) - Candidates from NGO/ exempted from taking DUMET - Female candidates who cleared DUMET but did not get admission due to their lower merit, filing writ petition challenging the reservation of 30 seats for NGO/, as unconstitutional and as violative of Regulation 5 of E MC/ Regulations - High Court dismissing the petition - On appeal, held: The reservation of 30 seats for NGO/ is not unconstitutional -- Exemption from taking DU MET to the NGO/ candidates is not ultra vires the MCI Regulations - The validity and constitutionality of the policy of Central F Government to reserve some seats on rational basis cannot 'be questioned - The seats reserved for NGO/ constitute separate source and selection on merits is to be confined to each separate source - However, directions for the University to issue instructions in future that candidates failing in DUMET would not be eligible for admission through NGO/ G quota - Reservation of 30 seats out of 150 seats is excessive - However, Central Government has taken steps to reduce the number to 15 from 30 in phases - Direction to Central Government to retook the extent of seats reserved for NGO/ H 512 SHAWNA GARG 8. ANR. v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & 513 ORS. in view of establishment of Medical Colleges in the States! A UTs for which the seats are allocated from NGO/ quota - Direction to the University to give admission on the basis of DUMET, on the vacant seats in NGO/ quota - Medical Council of India Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 - Regulation 5. B The University of Delhi issued Bulletin for admission to undergraduate degree courses including MBBS course for the academic session 2011-12. The Bulletin stated that the MBBS course was conducted in three Government Colleges i.e. Lady Harding Medical College C (LHMC), Maulana Azad Medical· College (MAMC) and University College of Medical Sciences (UCMS). In LHMC ·only female candidates were to be admitted. In the three colleges there were 500 seats for MBBS course. 15% of the seats were to be filled up directly on the basis of D CBSE examination. 36 seats (30 seats in LHMC and 6 in MAMC) were reserved for Nominees of Government of India (NGOI). The candidates from NGOI quota were exempted from taking the DUMET. All other candidates · were to get admission to the course, on the basis of Delhi E University Medical and Dental Entrance Test (DUMET). LHMC was to admit only female students. The appellants had applied as female general category candidates and also cleared the DUMET. As they F did not get admission in any of the three colleges, they ' filed writ petitions before High Court for a direction to quash the Bulletin, insofar as it provided for filling of 30 seats out of 150 seats in the MBBS course in LHMC by NGOI and for a direction to the authorities to fill up the G 30 seats from the general category candidates and that they be considered for such admission. The High Court relying on the judgment passed in *Kumari Chitra Ghosh and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors. 1969 (2) SCC 228 dismissed the petitions. Hence the present appeals. H 514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 10 S.C.R. A Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The Central Government reserved 260 seats in the MBBS course for the Central Pool and classified the sources from which admissions were to be 8 made to the 260 seats on geographical and other basis. It has not been shown by the appellants that the classification of the sources from which admissions are to be made has no rational nexus with the objects sought to be achieved by the policy of the Central C Government Hence, the validity and constitutionality of the policy of the Central Government to reserve some seats on geographical and some other rational basis cannot be questioned. However, reservation of as many as 260 se
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.