R.D. GARDI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ANR. ETC. versus STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [2010] 12 S.C.R. 692 · Decided: 30-09-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 12 S.C.R. 692 
A 
R.D. GARDI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ANR. ETC. 
B 
V. 
STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos.8429-8430 of 2010) 
SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND T.S. THAKUR, JJ.] 
Admissions - Medical admissions - Academic session 
2010-11 - Allocation of seats between the management and 
C the State -
Appeals against order passed by the High Court 
in Writ Petitions whereby a total of 15 seats in the 1st year 
MBBS course were directed to be reduced from out of the 
management quota of the appellant-college for the academic 
session 2010-2011 - Held: The appeals are an abuse of the 
D process of law, for two reasons; a) consent of appellant-
institution to reduction of seats from management quota as 
recorded in the impugned order of the High Court and b) 
earlier order passed by Supreme Court and order passed by 
High Court in a connected matter - Reduction of seats had 
E to be only from the management quota. for it was the 
management who had committed an irregularity which it was 
directed to correct by surrendering an equal number of seats 
to the State - High Court rightly held that unfilled NRI seats 
were to be shared equally between the college and the 
F management and as appellant-college had utilized the 
unfilled NRI seats all by itself it had committed clear 
irregularity justifying reduction of the excess seats during the 
session 2010-2011 - Judicial process - Abuse. 
G 
For the academic session 2006-2007, the appellant-
H 
medical college admitted to the first year of MBBS course 
19 students who had not secured 50% marks in the 
entrance examination. The legality of the said admissions 
692 
R.D. GARDI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ANR. ETC. v. 693 
STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. 
came up for scrutiny before the High Court which 
A 
declar~d the same to be illegal and, as such, liable to be 
cancelled. The Supreme Court' by order dated 4th 
September, 2008 while holding that the college was not 
justified in giving admission to ineligible students, 
permitted the students to continue their studies, but 
B 
directed that an equal number of seats (i.e. 19 seats) shall 
be reduced from the management quota of the college for 
the academic session 2009-2010. Subsequently, the High 
Court by order dated 22nd April, 2009, on the analogy of 
the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court, directed 2 more 
C 
seats, against which ineligible students were admitted, to 
be reduced from management quota of the appellant-
college for the academic session 2009-2010 thereby 
taking the total number of seats to be reduced from the 
quota of the management to 21. 
D 
Meanwhile the private educational institutions filed 
writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of the 
"M.P. Niji Vyavsayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka 
Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007" 
E 
which was disposed of by the High Court, aggrieved 
whereof the private educational institutions filed appeal 
in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the 
impugned enactment in so far as the same handedover 
the entire selection process to the State Government or 
F 
the agencies appointed by it for under-graduate, graduate 
and post-graduate medical/dental colleges and fee 
fixation, was contrary to the observations made by the 
11-Judge Bench of this Court in T.M.A. Pai's case; and 
that a literal interpretation of the Act would render the 
G 
same unconstitutional. An interim arrangement was 
accordingly made under which 15% seats were to be first 
excluded towards NRI quota to be filled up by the private 
institutions. Out of remaining 85% seats available for 
admission to the under-graduate and post-graduate 
H 
694 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010) 12 S.C.R. 
A courses, 50% were to be given to the State Government 
while the remaining 50% were to be filled up on the basis 
of a selection process to be conducted by separate 
entrance examination for the purpose. 
B 
A writ petition was filed before the High Court, 
alleging that the allocation of seats between the 
management and the State was not proper nor was the 
reduction of 21 seats from the management quota given 
effect to, as directed by the Court. The High Court held 
c that 21 seats permitted to be reduced from the 
management quota had been erroneously reduced from 
the total of 100 seats available in the college and directed 
10 seats to be reduced from out of the management 
quota for the academic session 2010-11. As regards the 
o NRI seats for the session 2009-

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