SANJAY AHLAWAT versus M.D. UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 59 · Decided: 24-11-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

SANJA Y ARLA WAT 
A 
v. 
M.D. UNIVERSITY AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 24, 1994 
[B.P. JEEV AN REDDY AND S.C. SEN, JJ.] 
B 
Constitution of India-Article 14-Clause 3(i) of Chapter IV of 
Prospectus for MD.IMS.IP.G. Diploma Entrance Examination, 1993 of 
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak-Provision for awarding 10 extra 
marks to locally qualified graduates-Whether arbitrary and discriminatory-
Held, No. 
C 
Education-Post Graduate Medical Courses-Entrance Examination--
Maharishi Dayanand University Rohtak-Clause 3(i) of Chapter IV of 
Prospectus-System of awarding 10 extra marks to locally qualified 
graduates-Constitutional validity of 
The appellant challenged the validity of clause 3 (i) of Chapter IV 
of the Prospectus for M.D./M.S./P.G. Diploma Entrance Examination, 
1993 of Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, on the allegation that 
the procedure for selection and admission of students to the Post 
Graduate Medical Course was arbitrary and discriminatory. 
A written test was held for the purpose of selection of candidates to 
the Post Graduate Medical Course. Maharishi Dayanand University 
allowed 10 extra marks to the candidates who had graduated from the 
Medical· College at Rohtak. The appellant's grievance was that the 
grant of 10 marks to the locally qualified students virtually amounted 
D 
E 
to shutting the doors of admission to Post Graduate Medical Courses to F 
the students who had qualified from other Universities, and that there 
was no chance of getting admission to Maharishi Dayanand Medical 
College in M.S./M.D. Course. 
According to the respondent University, the main reason for the 
rule of granting weightage of 10 marks to the candidates, who were G 
graduates of Medical College, Rohtak, was that there was only one 
Medical College in the entire State of Haryana, and that there had been 
shortage of doctors, in particular specialist doctors in Haryana. 
Therefore, some preference. had to be given to the local graduates. It 
was most emphatically denied that granting 10 additiona1 marks to the 
local graduates, in fact, ensured 100% reservation for the State. 
H 
59 
60 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R 
A 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court· 
HELD:l.1. The appellant has been unable to establish that the 
system of awarding 10 extra marks to the graduates of the only 
Medical College for admission to the Post Graduate Medical Courses in 
the State of Haryana, is in any way discrjminatory and violates Article 
B 
14 of the Constitution of India. It has been explained on behalf of the 
respondents that the extra marks are awarded to the local medical 
graduates for the purpose of ensuring that medical facility in the State 
is not impaired in any way because of dearth of doctors. It is expected 
that the resi~ents of Haryana, after obtaining Medical Degrees, will 
remain in Haryana and their services will be available to the people of 
C 
the State~ This distinction cannot be regarded as arbitrary and 
discriminatory ha.ving regard to the object stated. Nidamarti Mahesh · 
Kumar v. State of Maharashtra, [1986) 2 SCC 534 and Pradeep Jain v. 
Union of India, [1984) 3 SCC 654, distinguished. [62 H, 63 A, BJ 
1.2. In the instant case, no reservation has been made for the boys 
D . graduating from Maharishi Dayanand Medical College at all. The 
students from other universities may apply for admission. There is no 
Reservation of seats college-wise or university-wise. But some 
preference is given to candidates, based on domicile in Haryana or · 
education. at the only Medical College at Haryana. This does not have 
the effect of shutting the doors of admission to the out-station boys. 
E 
. [64 B, CJ 
F 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8033/94. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.2.94 of the High Court Punjab 
& Haryana in CWP. No. 12353/93. 
Ravinder Bana for the Appellant. 
Nidhesh Gupta and A.K. Mahajan for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
G 
SEN, J. Special leave granted. 
Sanjay Ahlawat, the appellant herein, has challenged the validity of 
clause 3 (i) of Chapter IV of the Prospectus for M.D./M.S./P.G. Diploma 
Entrance Exawination, 1.993 of Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, on 
the atlegatimf that the procedure for selection and admission of students to 
H 
the Post-Graduate Medical Course is arbitrary and discriminatory. 
.... 
SANJA Y AHLA WAT v. M.D. UNIVERSITY [SEN, J.] 
61 
A written examination is held for the purpose of selection 

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