LexTHE STATE OF MADHYPRADESH AND ORS. versus GOPAL D. TIRTHANI AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
THE STA TE OF MAD HY A PRADESH AND ORS
V.
GOPAL D. TIRTHANI AND ORS.
JULY 28, 2003
[R.C. LAHOTI AND ASHOK BHAN, JJ.]
Education-Higher Education-Admission to Post Graduate Medical
Courses within State-Selection criteria:
A
B
Allocation of 20% seats in post graduation for in-service candidates- C
doctors in employment of State Government-Validity of-Held: Such a/location
is not a reservation but a separate and exclusive channel of entry or source
of admission-In-service candidates and open category candidates constitute
two classes based on intelligible differentia, having rational relation with
the object that the in-service candidates on attaining post graduate degree D
would be available for being posted in rural areas hy State Government-
Thus, there is reasonable nexus between classification and object sought to
be achieved-Hence, not violative of Article 14-Madhya Pradesh Medical
and Dental Post Graduation Entrance Examination Rules, 2003-Rule 8.5-
Madhya Pradesh Medical and Dental Post Graduation Entrance Examination
Rules, 2002-Rules 8.6./-Constitution of India, 1950-Article 14.
E
Separate entrance examinations for in-service and open category
candidates-Permissibility of-Held: There should be only one common
entrance test for determining the eligibility-A/so the minimum qualifYing
marks should not be lowered or relaxed contrary to Medical Council of India
Regulations-Medical Council of India Regulations-Regulation 9(/)(i) and F
9(1) first proviso.
Standard of assessment-Regulation 9(/)(i) providing selection on the
basis of merit as determined by competitive test conducted by Stale Government
and clause (iii) on individual cumulative performance in first, second and G
third MBBS examinations having passed ji-om the same University-State
Government combining Regulation 9(/)(i) and (iii) by resorting to clause
(iv)-Held: When there are more than one University in a State, their standard
and assessment method may differ-Thus, in Stale of MP there being more
than one University comparative merit of individual performance cannot be
797
H
798
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) SUPP. I S.C.R.
A assessed by reference to Reg11lation 9(2J(iii) either singly or in combination
with cla11se (i)-Medica/ Co11ncil of India Regulations-Reg11lation 9(/){i),
(iii) and (iv).
Weightage for rural areas service to in-service doctors-Permissibility
of-Held: Reasonable weightage can be assigned to in-service doctors for
B having rendered specified number of years of service in rural areas for
purpose of determining inter se merit within class of in-service candidates
having qualified pre-PG lest-It also satisfies lest of Article 14-Madhya
Pradesh Medical and Dental Post Graduate Admission (In-service) Rules,
2002-Ru/es I and 2-Constitution of India, 1950-Article 14.
c
Weightage for rural service to in-service doctors, jive years for male
doctors and three years for female doctors-Valid1ty of-Held: Women
candidates having rendered three years consecutive service in rural areas
constitute a class based on intelligible differentia and are well-deflned-
Relaxation in eligibility c!'iteria for female doctors for specified discipline-
D Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Anaesthesia is reasonable and has nexus with
the object of serving women folk in villages, thus satisfies test of Article 14-
Madhya Pradesh Medical and Dental Post Graduate Admission (ln-servic~)
Rules, 2002-Rules I and 2-Constitution of India, 1950-Article 14.
The State Government of Madhya Pradesh promulgated Madhya Pradesh
E Medical and Dental Post Graduation Entrance Examination Rules, 2002. It
provided for allocation of 20% seats in post graduate courses for in-service
candidates-doctors in the employment of State Government and a!so exempted
them from taking PG Entrance examination. Thereafter, Madhya Pradesh
Medical and Dental Post Graduate Admission (In-Service) Rules, 2002 came
F to be promulgated, providing selection criteria for in-service candidates in
post graduate courses.
Separate pre-P.G. Entrance Examin11tion for year 2002-2003 was to be
held for open category candidates-doctors not in the employment of the State
Government and in-service candidates-Assistant Surgeons (doctors) in the
G employment of the State Government However, before holding orthe tests writ
petitions were filed challenging the constitutional validity of PG Entrance
Examination Rules, 2002 and PG Admission (In-Service) Rules, 2002. Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.