DR. JEEVAK ALMAST versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [1988] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 385 · Decided: 12-08-1988 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA, M.N. VENKATACHALIAH · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

DR. JEEV AK ALMAST 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & . ORS. 
AUGUST 12, 1988. 
[RANGANATH MISRA AND M.N. VENKATACHALIAH, JJ.] 
B 
Professional Colleges-Admission to: Post Graduate Medical 
Course-All India Entrance Examination-A.I.l.M.S. Bulletin of 
Information clauses 11 and 15(g)-Validity of-Unfilled seats-Direc-
tions issued bv Court. 
· 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 14"-Judicial determination 
not to be tested on the touch stone of this provision. 
In compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr. 
Pradeep Jain etc. v. Union of India & Ors. etc., (1984] 3 SCR 942 and 
c 
on the basis of the scheme approved by the Court, respondent No. 2 
D 
held an All India Entrance Examination for filling up 25 per cent seats 
in different Post· Graduate Medical Colleges in the States and Union 
Territories and those run by public authorities. The scheme provided 
that cut off.base should be SO per cent marks. Out of about 2100 seats, 
only 500 could be filled. 
In the Writ Petition filed before this Court, the petitioner, an 
unsuccessful candidate at the aforesaid examination sought ( 1) a direc-
tion that clauses l1 and lS(g) of the Bulletin of Information, published 
E 
by respondent No. 2 in this regard were illegal, unconstitutional and 
incompetent, (2) a writ of certiorari to quash the list of successful candi-
dates for admissfon within 25% reserved quota, and (3) a writ of man-
F 
damus to the respondents to admit the petitioner and similarly placed 
other candidates against the 1500 odd seats left out due to the arbitrary 
decision/action of the respondents, contending that no seat should go 
unfilled. 
Disposing of the Writ Petition and .a pending CMP in other dis-
G 
posed of Writ Petitions, 
HELD: 1.1 It is well-settled that judicial determination is not to 
be tested by the touchstone of Article 14 of the Constitution. [388B] 
In the instant case since the bulletin is in accordance with the 
H 
385 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
386 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 
scheme approved by this Court, and the examination has been held 
following the terms thereof, the petitioner is not entitled to ask for 
quashing a part of the bulletin and the list of selected candidates. There 
is no tenable challenge against the examination. IJ87H, 388A] 
1.2 Since in the very first year of implementing the scheme, a 
stalemate has arisen, it is appropriate to give certain directions, which 
may in the facts and circumstances, be appropriate and adequate to 
meet the situation to the extent possible . .Sufficient number of qualified 
doctors are not available. Every step should, therefore, be taken to turn 
out as many doctors with Post Graduate qualification as possible. Since 
about 1600 seats have reverted to the States and medical colleges 
located within them, and have to be filled up, it is in the interest of the 
parties that this should be done as quickly as possible so that the 
academic time-schedule may be stuck to. [388B-C, F, 389D I 
1.3 Respondent No. 2 is directed to supply to each State and/or 
Union Territory from where candidates !)ad appeared at the entrance 
test, candidate-wise particulars confined to such State. Once these 
particulars are available, the Selection Committee operating in the 
State and/or Union Territory or in the respective. medical colleges 
covered by the scheme, as the case may be, shall draw up a list of the 
remaining candidates seeking admission as against the 75 per cent of the 
seats and the candidates who had taken the All India Entrance examina-
tion, but have not been found fit on the. basis of the marks secured in 
their respective selection tests or at the MBBS examination, in Stales 
where there is no such selection test relating 75 per cent seats. This shall 
be on the footing that marks in the respective selection tests or the test 
and the examination are at par and admission would be on the basis of 
merit. No doubt, the All India Selection test had been a stricter one, but 
it would not be possible for this Court now to direct what weightage is to 
be added on that score. Once the common list is drawn up on the basis of 
· performance, admission to remaining seats can be taken up. [389F-G I 
!The admissions already effected inclusive of seats in the reserved 
quota shall continue. But further admissions in respect of unfilled seats 
as against the 25 per cent quota shall he· deferred now and again taken 
up after the list of eligible candidates is drawn up 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.