SATYAPRATA SAHOO & ORS. versus STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

Citation: [2012] 10 S.C.R. 204 · Decided: 03-08-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2012] 10 S.C.R. 204 
SATYAPRATA SAHOO & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos.5705-06 of 2012) 
AUGUST 3, 2012 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.J 
Education - Medical College - Admission/Entrance to 
PG Medical courses - State of Odisha - Seats earmarked 
C for in-service category candidates - Weightage marks to in-
service category candidates applying through the direct 
category route who had rendered service in rural/tribal/ 
backward areas - Challenged - Held: If on the strength of 
such weightage, the in-service candidates encroach upon the 
D open category, i.e direct admission category, then such 
encroachment or inroad or appropriation of seats earmarked 
for open category candidates (direct admission category) 
would definitely affect the candidates who compete strictly on 
the basis of the merit - Purpose and object for giving 
E weightage to in-service candidates who have rendered rural/ 
tribal service is laudable, but they have to come through the 
proper channel i.e. the channel exclusively earmarked for in-
service candidates and not through the channel earmarked 
for candidates in the open category - Further, seats 
F earmarked for the open category by way of merit were few in 
number and encroachment by the in-service candidates into 
the open category would violate clause 9(1)(a) of the MCI 
regulations, which says students for PG medical courses shall 
be selected strictly on the basis of the inter se academic merit 
G i.e. on the basis of the merit determined by the competent test 
- Candidates of in-service category cannot encroach upon 
the open category, so also vice-versa - In view of the stand 
taken by the Medical Council of India that seats for post-
graduate courses cannot be increased, direction given to the 
H 
204 
SATYAPRATA SAHOO & ORS. v. STATE OF ORISSA 205 
& ORS. 
State of Odisha or their undertakings to take back the in-
A 
service candidates into their service and permit them to serve 
in the rural/tribal areas so that they can compete through the 
category of in-se;vice candidates in the 50% seats earmarked 
for them - The State of Odisha, the Medical Council of India 
and respondents 1 to 4 directed to take urgent steps to re-
B 
arrange the merit list and to fill up the seats of the direct 
category, excluding in-service candidates who got admission 
in the open category on the strength of said weightage, and 
give admission to the open category candidates strictly on the 
basis of merit -
Postgraduate Medical Education c 
Regulations, 2000 - Clause 9(2)(d), third proviso - Indian 
Medical Council Act, 1956 - ss. 10-A and 11 (2). 
The appellants had appeared in the entrance 
examination as 'direct candidates' (Open Category) and 
qualified purely on merit for admission to Post-Graduate 
D 
(Medical) Selection 2012, Odisha in the Government 
Medical Colleges in Odisha. The Prospectus for Post-
Graduate (Medical) Selection, 2012, Odisha dealt with 
availability of seats both in the category of direct as well 
as in-service candidates. Clause 11.2 of the Prospectus 
E 
stipulated additional weightage for candidates who were 
in employment of Government of Odisha/Government of 
Odis ha undertaking/Government. of India Public 
Undertaking located in Odisha and had worked in Rural/ 
Tribal/Backward areas while applying through the 
F 
category of direct candidates. 
The appellants challenged the validity of Clause 11.2 
of the Prospectus submitting that it was violative of Article 
14 of the Constitution; and also prayed for quashing the 
G 
Medical Council of India ('MCI') Notification No. 51210 of 
17 .11.2009 (which provided weightage marks to in-
service candidates applying through the direct category) 
on the ground that it was a clear encroachment and 
appropriation of seats earmarked for the direct category 
H 
206 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012) 10 S.C.R. 
A candidates to be filled up purely on merit, subject to rule 
of reservation. The appellants' challenge was repelled by 
the single Judge of the High Court as well as the Division 
Bench and therefore the instant appeals. 
8 
The main controversy in this case is whether 
candidates from direct admission category have to be 
selected strictly on the basis of their inter-se academic 
merit or whether it is legal to dilute the merit to the extent 
as indicated in the third Proviso to Clause 9(2)(d) of the 
C Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. By 
virtue of third proviso to Clause 9

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