DR. MUNEEB UL REHMAN HAROON AND ORS. versus GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR STATE AND ORS.

Citation: [1985] 1 S.C.R. 344 · Decided: 13-08-1984 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
' ' . ' . 
DR. MUNEEB UL REHMAN HAROON AND ORS. 
v. 
GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR STATE 
AND ORS. 
August 13, 1984 
[Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, C.J., A. VARADARAJAN AND AMARENDRA 
NATH SEN, JJ .] 
Constitution of India 1950, Articles )4 and 19 
Medi1..·al Col/eges-1Vo admi•sious 1nade to Post-Graduate medical course 
for three consecutive seniesters-Action of authorities whether r;irbitrary and 
violative of fundamental rights. 
D 
Practice and Procedure-Mala /ides-Plea of·-Bald assertion in writ 
E 
F 
G 
H 
petition-Insufficient-Specific facts to be alleged. 
The petitioners in the writ petitions were medical gradultes who 
applied for ad.nission to the Post-gradu.ite course in the Medical College, 
Srinagar for the semester beginning in July 1970, appJared for an entrance 
test but the result was rIOt declared officially. 
They contended in their 
writ petitions that the refllsal of the Government to admit any student at 
all for the Post-Graduate course for the three semesters \Vhich commenced 
in July 1980, November 1980 and July 1981 was viola•.ive of the funda. 
mental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution, 
besides being ma la fide. 
The State Government contested the writ petitions contending that 
the rules which were in operation in July, 1980 governing admission to the 
Post-Graduate Medical Course, were prejudicial to the 
interests of the 
students of Jammu Medical College and were to an extent discriminatory 
and that was 
why rio admissions were made to the July 1980 semester, 
that the amendment of the rules of admission 
were initiated so as to 
bring them in conformity with the requirements of the Constitution, and 
that this took a long period of 18 months. 
Dismissing the writ petitions, 
.. 
1 
-
-
M. U. REHMAN v. 1. K. STAril 
34S 
HELD : 
There is no violation of any of the fundamental rights of 
A 
the petitioners nor is the action of the State authorities arbitrary or 
ma/a fide. [J48C] 
Atala fides cannot be a~$un1ed while dealing with a question which has 
far-re~ching consequences. 
No .specific facts havo been alleged on the basis 
of which a finding can be recorded that the decisicn not to adtnit any student 
at all for three consecutive semesters was actuated by a rnala fide intention 
on the part. of the St;.te .Government. 
There is only a bald assertion in 
the writ petitions that a total ban was placed on admission to the three 
consecutive semesters in order to r.~vour some per.sons. [347H-348A] 
In the instant case, u11til the year 1973 there was only one Medical 
College in the State of Jammu & KashmirJ wbich was at Srinagar. 
The 
Medical College al Jammu wo1s started in 197 3. 
The Jammu Medical 
Co\ 1ege was affiliated to the Ja.mmu University while the Srinagar Medical 
College W<lS affiliated 
10 K«shmir University. 
The statutes of Jammu 
B 
c 
University did not correspond to th·~ statutes of the Kashmir Uoiversity 
D 
for admission to the Post-graduate courseJ thcreb)' causing discrimination 
in favour of thoSe fulfilling the 
requir~inents under the statutes of the 
Kashmir University as against those eligible under the statutes of the 
Jammu University. 
That was why, the State Government had to take 1 
action for :uriog the defects Which were inherent in the prevailing proce .. 
dure for selection to the Post-Graduate Medical Course in 'the two medical 
E 
colleges. 
The Kashmir University statute was arnended so as to introduce 
uniformity in the rules of admission. 
According to clause 3 of the 1980 
Notice of Admission, it WJS necessary for the caodidcites to have completed 
one year's Con1pulsory House Job in the concerned speciality, as provided 
in the statutes of the Kashmir University. 
Under the amended µrovisions 
which came into force in 1981 candidates had to complete one years's 
F 
House Job in a recognised institut!on in the concerued subject or six months' 
House Job in the concerned subject and six months' House Job in an •allied 
subject. The amended rule conforms to the rule which prevailed in other 
parts of the country and was in accordance with recommendations of the 
Medical Council of India. [347C-G] 
ORIGINAL JuRISDicnoN: Writ Petition No. 1742 & 3129 of 
1981. 
Under article 32 of the Constitution of India. 
Vimal Dave for the Petitioner. 
G 
H 
346 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1985j I s.C.k. 
A 
Alta! Ahmed for the Respondent. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
CHANDRACHUD, C. J. These Writ

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