Skip to content


Sanjiv Chandra Vs. S. Padmawati and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Writ Appeal No. 687 of 1971
Judge
Reported inILR1971Delhi180
ActsDelhi University Act, 1922 - Sections 30; Constitution of India - Article 14
AppellantSanjiv Chandra
RespondentS. Padmawati and ors.
Advocates: B.R. Iyengar,; B.T. Singh,; D.K. Kapur,;
Cases ReferredD.N. ChancUa v. The State of Mysore and Ors.
Excerpt:
(i) delhi university act (1922) - section 30--power to issue ordinances under, to regulate admission of students.; according to section 30 of the delhi university act (act viii of 1922) ordinances can be issued regulating the admission of students to the university and their enrolment as such. according to ordinance ii (5) the standing committee of the academic council will review ordinarily in november each year the principles adopted by the various courses admission committees for admissions to the courses concerned and to co-ordinate, wherever necessary, the admission procedure adopted by these committees. thus the standing committee of the academic council by virtue of the ordinances has the power to review in november each year the principles adopted by the various courses admission.....prithvi raj, j. (1) originally three petitioners, namely, sanjiv chandra, arun shashi mago and anil kumaraggarwal, filed the writ petition challenging the changes made in the admission rules, incorporated by the maulana azad medical college, delhi, in the prospectus for the admission .to the m.b.b.s. course in 1971-72, on the ground that the changes so incorporated are illegal, without authority and unconstitutional. further relief claimed by the petitioners was that the classification done by the respondents for admitting 100 students on merit and 39 students through entrance examination be struck down and declared illegal, unconstitutional and in violation of articles 14, 15, 19 and 29 of the constitution. the petitioners also sought a direction by way of a writ of mandamus, or any.....
Judgment:

Prithvi Raj, J.

(1) Originally three petitioners, namely, Sanjiv Chandra, Arun Shashi Mago and Anil KumarAggarwal, filed the writ petition challenging the changes made in the admission rules, incorporated by the Maulana Azad Medical College, Delhi, in the prospectus for the admission .to the M.B.B.S. course in 1971-72, on the ground that the changes so incorporated are illegal, without authority and unconstitutional. Further relief claimed by the petitioners was that the classification done by the respondents for admitting 100 students on merit and 39 students through entrance examination be struck down and declared illegal, unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14, 15, 19 and 29 of the Constitution. The petitioners also sought a direction by way of a writ of mandamus, or any other suitable writ or direction directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners for the 100 seats reserved for admission on merit basis and that their cases be considered on the basis laid down in the earlier year's prospectus.

(2) Mr. Iyengar the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on the 15th July, 1971, sought permission of the Court to amend the writ petition and he was allowed to amend the same, the amended writ petition, however, was filed only on behalf of Sanjiv Chandra the present petition before us wherein he prayed' that the respondents be directed to admit him to the M.B.B.S. course on the basis of marks secured by him at the Intermediate examination held by the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, ignoring the altered conditions of admission introduced in the year 1971-72.

(3) The case of the petitioner is that he is a permanent resident of Delhi. He has passed his Higher Secondary Examination of the Central Board of Education, New Delhi, in the year 1969 and obtained 58.75 percent marks. He also passed the Pre-Medical Examination of Delhi University in the year 1970 and obtained 53.5 per cent marks in it, and is entitled to be admitted in the Medical College as he has improved his marks in a subsequent attempt by securing 74 per cent marks.

(4) 180 students are admitted to the M.B.B.S. Course in the Maulana Azad Medical College (hereinafter referred to as the 'Medical College') since 1970-71 when the number of seats was increased from 140 to 180. out of the 180 seats, 15 per cent are reserved for Scheduled Castes and 5 per cent of the total seats for Scheduled Tribes. Five seats are reserved for the nominees of Government of India falling under the categories mentioned under sub-clause (d) of Rule 3.1 of the College Prospectus of the Medical College for the year 1971-72. The remaining 139 seats have been bifurcated into two categories. Out of these 139 seats, 100 are reserved for students of Delhi while 39 seats are to be filled on the basis of entrance examination to be held by the respondents.

(5) For the 100 seats reserved for students of Delhi a candidate to be selected against the same should fulfill one of the following conditions of eligibility:-

(A) must have passed B.Sc. General (Group 'B') Examination from Delhi University in 1st Division after passing the Pre-Medical examination of Delhi University, (b) must have passed Pre-medical examination from Delhi University in first class in first attempt after passing Higher Secondary (3 year course) of the Central Board of Secondary Education New Delhi or the Indian School Certificate from a School located in Delhi, as a regular student.

(6) Not only a candidate has to fulfill one of the above conditions but further these 100 seats are to be filled in the order of merit of candidates who have passed B.Sc. General (Group 'B') vide eligibility condition 3.2.B(l)(a) and then in order of merit of the aggregate of marks by those who have passed the Pre-Medical examination vide eligibility condition 3.2 B(l)(b). For the 29 seats which are to be filled on the basis of entrance examination a candidate has to fulfill as per clause 'C' of Rule 3.2 of the College Prospectus, one of the following conditions-

(A) must have passed the Pre-Medical Examination of Delhi University with not less than 55% marks in the aggregate, (b) must have passed B.Sc. General (Group 'B') examination of Delhi University with 55% marks in aggregate after passing the pre-medical or equivalent examination, (c) must have passed I.Sc. (Medical Group) or equivalent examination with 55% marks in the aggregate of four compulsory subjects i.e. English, Physics, Chemistry (including Organic Chemistry) and Biology after passing Higher Secondary Examination (3 years course) of the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, or Indian School Certificate examination from School located in Delhi, as a regular student, (d) must be sons and daughters of Central Government servants posted in Delhi or transferred to Delhi provided appointment/transfer of the Delhi Central Government servant took place within 3 years on or before 20th June, 1971. Such candidates must have passed the Pre-medical examination from recognised Universities or any other equivalent examination with 55% marks in the aggregate of four compulsory subjects i.e., English, Physics, Chemistry (including Organic Chemistry) and Biology.

(7) The grievance of the petitioner is that prior to the admission for the present year . i.e. 1971-72, no entrance examination was held by the College for admission to the M.B.B.S. course and it is for the first time that entrance examination is proposed to be held for filling the 39 posts while previously the students were admitted to the M.B.B.S. course on the basis of merit list prepared by the College. Apart from other conditions of eligibility contained in Rule 3.2 of the prospectus of the College issued for the years 1970-71, the minimum condition of eligibility for registration of applications for admission to the First year M.B.B.S. course was 55 /o marks in the aggregate of compulsory subjects, i.e., English, Physics, Chemistry (including organic Chemistry) and Biology at the Pre-Medical examination of the Delhi University or an examination recognised by the Delhi University as equivalent thereto. The petitioner alleges that according to Rule 3.4 of the previous year's prospectus the selection of candidates to the M.B.B.S. course used to be made by order of preference of selection of candidates. Rule 3.4 of the previous year's prospectus is reproduced below for facility of reference :-

(A) The order of preference of selection of candidates will be as follows :- (i) B.Sc.-1st Division with one or more subjects of Medical Group, viz.. Botany, Zoology, Physics and Chemistry after passing the Pre-Medical examination of Delhi University or an equivalent examination, (ii) Pre-medical examination of Delhi University or an examination recognised by the University or equivalent there to, (i) B.Sc.-Second Division and Third Division candidates will be judged on the basis of their Pre-medical or equivalent examination marks. These candidates will have no preference over Pre-Medical/I.Sc. (Medical Group) Examination students. (i) Admission to the M.B.B.S. course in this college under clause (ii) and (iii) above will be made in order of merit on the basis of percentage of total marks obtained in the four compulsory subjects, i.e. English, Physics, Chemistry including Organic Chemistry and Biology at the Pre-medical examination of Delhi University or an examination recognised by the University as equivalent thereto. (ii) In case there are more than one candidate obtaining equal percentage of marks (according to 3.4 B (i), the selection will be made on the basis of percentage of marks in the aggregate of three Science subjects only (i.e. Physics, Chemistry and Biology). (iii a) For preparation of the merit list of the results (i.e. the latest) of the Pre-medical or equivalent examination shall be taken into account. Those who have passed in the 2nd attempt or improved their performance and a subsequent examination, the percentage of total marks will be lowered by 3 per cent obtained at the last examination for the merit list, (e.g., if a candidate has obtained 56 per cent marks at Higher Pre-medical examination and has improved his/her performance at a subsequent examination obtaining 62 percent marks, his/her percentage after deduction of 3 percent marks will be considered at 59 per cent for merit list). (iii b) A candidate who has passed Intermediate (Science) or any other equivalent examination without one or more of the four subjects required for admission to the 1st year M.B.B.S. Course (Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English), subsequently passed with the required subjects mentioned above, 3 percent marks will be deducted from the percentage of aggregate marks of the four subjects mentioned above to determine his/her merit for selection purposes.

(8) The petitioner further alleges that he could not come on the merit list to the M.3.B.S. course for 1970-71 and although he was offered seat in the other courses during the said academic year, he did not join those courses and preferred to improve in the second attempt so as to qualify for the admission to the M.B.B.S. course in the Medical College during the academic year 1971-72B.

(9) The petitioner also alleges that there are no arrangements by the Delhi University for improvement of the result and he accordingly had to appear in the Inter Science Examination held by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.), Bhopal in the month of April, 1971, and he secured above 74% marks in the aforesaid examination. The contention of the petitioner is that he is a resident of Delhi and on the basis of improvement of the result in his Inter Science examination in which he secured 74% marks, as stated above, he is entitled to be considered for admission to 139 seats of the M.B.B.S. course other than the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and five seats reserved for Government of India nominees. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been considered against the 100 seats reserved for the students of Delhi on the basis of improvement of result in the Inter Science examination held by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.), Bhopal as the management of the Medical College and the Selection Committee made changes in the prospectus issued for the year 1971-72 and that the authorities have also not considered him for the remaining 39 seats as well which are proposed to be filled through entrance examination although he is entitled to be considered on the basis of his merit according to rule 3.4 B (iiia) of the rules for 1970-71 according to which rule for preparation of the merit list of the results (i.e., the latest) of the Pre-medical or equivalent examination are to be taken into account and those candidates who have passed in the 2nd attempt or improved their performance at a subsequent examination, the percentage of total marks has to be lowered by 3 percent obtained at the last examination for the merit list. It is alleged by the petitioner that the examination of Inter Science which was conducted by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.) Bhopal is recognised by the University of Delhi as equivalent to the Pre-medical examination of the University of Delhi and the respondents in not considering the petitioner for admission to the M.B.B.S. course have committed an illegality by discriminating between him as he has passed the Inter Science Examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.) Bhopal and the students who have passed Pre-Medical examination from the University of Delhi. This act of the respondents is challenged being discriminatory and against the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.

(10) NON-SELECTION of the petitioner for admission to the M.B.B.S. course is also challenged on the ground that the changes in the prospectus for the year 1971-72 have been made by the Admission Committee of the respondents who were not competent to lay down any conditions or principles, to add or to circumscribe the conditions prescribed by the ordinance of the Delhi University issued in the year 1952 for the admission to the M.B.B.S. course according to which admission to medical course was open to a candidate who had passed in any of the following examinations :

(A) Pre-medical Examination of the University of Delhi; (b) Intermediate Examination in Arts or Science of an Indian University with Physics, Chemistry (including Organic Chemistry), Biology as subjects, provided with the examination included a practical test in each of those subjects; or (c) An examination of a Board or other Body recognised by the University as equivalent thereto.

(11) On the .facts enumerated above the petitioner contends that since he has improved his position by securing 74% marks in the Inter Science Examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.) Bhopal, he is entitled to be admitted to the M.B.B.S. course.

(12) Mr. V. Narasinhan Registrar (Academic) Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, filed reply affidavit to the writ petition on behalf of respondent No. 1 staling that the Medical College is a Government Institution under the administrative control of Delhi Administration. The rules of admission to the first year M.B.B.S. course of the College were laid down by the Delhi University in consultation with the Delhi Administration for the academic year 1971-72. He states that 100 seats are reserved in the College for residents of Delhi who satisfy the conditions of eligibility laid down in clause 3.2.B(i) of the College prospectus and 39 seats are to be filled on the basis of entrance examination. The conditions of eligibility for appearing at the said examination are to be found in clause 3.2..C(i) of the College prospectus. The remaining seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes students and the nominees of Government of India falling under categories mentioned under sub-clause (d) of Rule 3.1 of the College prospectus of the College for the year 1971-72. The contention of respondent No. 1 is that for selection of 100 seats reserved for Delhi students the applications of the candidates who satisfied the conditions of eligibility were scrutinized and a merit list was drawn. The said list was placed before the Medical Courses Admission Committee of the Delhi University which approved the same in its meeting on the 14th June, 1971, and admissions to the College were done from those candidates who had passed the Pre-medical examination from the University of Delhi in the first division in first attempt and who had passed Higher Secondary (3-year course) examination of Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, through one of the Schools located in Delhi as a regular student or who had done the Indian School Certificate examination from one of the schools located in Delhi. Apart from the other conditions stipulated, respondent No. 1 further submits that Delhi being a Metropolitan city having citizens not only of Delhi but also of other States, their interests were also protected by introducing a system of admission through entrance examination. According to respondent No. 1 the petitioner was not eligible for admission to direct seats and was only eligible for appearing in the entrance examination and competing with others in the said examination subject to the satisfaction of conditions eligibility laid down with regard to the marks obtained in the Inter Science Examination. Respondent No. 1 denied that the petitioner is a resident of Delhi and further stated that 40 more seats were created after closing down the admission for the year 1970-71, raising the number of seats from 140 to 180, for the specific purpose of admitting first class Pre-medical students of Delhi University. However, during the academic year 1971-72, instead of reserving 40 seats for Pre-medical students of Delhi University 100 seats have been reserved for them, and the clause of certificate of residence is no more in the eligibility conditions prescribed for admission to the M.B.B.S. course. The further contention of respondent No. 1 is that there is no provision in the rules for the year 1971-72 for admission to the Medical College by meeting standards of other Universities and that the changes in the Rules for the year 1971-72 have been made under authority of law. The rules of admission have been recommended by Academic Council of Delhi University and have been incorporated in the prospectus of the College after the concurrence of Delhi Administration.

(13) The Registrar of the University of Delhi in his reply affidavit has stated that clause 4 of Ordinance 2 framed under the Delhi University Act empowers the admission committee to determine the principles on which admissions are to be made and finalise the cases of admission, and, according to clause 5 of the said Ordinance (Ordinance II) the standing Committee can review the principles for admission each year. He further states that in exercise of the aforesaid powers, necessary changes in the rules for admission were proposed in consultation with the Delhi Administration and the Central Government by the Medical Courses Admission Committee constituted under Ordinance 2 Clause I, sub-clause (i) under Delhi University Act, by its resolution No. 2 dated 19th February, 1971 and the said proposals were duly approved by the Academic Council which is the highest Academic authority in the University by its resolution No. 39 dated 9th April, 1971. The changes approved were duly incorporated and notified in the prospectus for the year 1971-72. On merits the Registrar of University of Delhi denied the allegation of the petitioner stating that for the admission against 100 seats, the petitioner was not eligible.

(14) Before us three contentions have been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The first contention is that the respondents are estopped from altering the eligibility conditions in respect of 100 seals reserved for Delhi candidates on the principle of promissory estoppel. The contention is that under rule 3.2 of the prospectus issued for earlier years up to 1970-71 according to clause (F) of the said Rules the minimum condition of eligibility for registration of applications for admission to 1st year M.B.B.S. Course shall be 55 per cent marks in the aggregate of compulsory subjects, viz., English, Physics, Chemistry (including Organic Chemistry) and Biology at the Pre-medical Examination of Delhi University or an examination recognised by the Delhi University as equivalent thereto but in the prospectus for the year 1971-72 the conditions of eligibility in respect of 100 seats reserved for Delhi candidates have been changed into (a) must have passed B.Sc. General (group 'B') examination of the Delhi University in first Division after passing the Pre-Medical examination of Delhi University or (b) must have passed Pre-Medical examination of the Delhi University in 1st Class in first attempt after passing higher secondary (three year course) of Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, or Indian School Certificate from a school located in Delhi as a regular student. It was contended that according to rule 3.4 B (iii a) of rules for 1970-71 for preparation of the merit list the results (i.e. the latest) of the Pre-medical or equivalent examination shall be taken into account. Those who have passed in the 2nd attempt or improved their performance at a subsequent examination, the percentage of total marks will be lowered by 3 per cent obtained at the last examination for the merit list. While according to the prospectus for the year 1971-72 merit list has to be prepared in the order of merit of candidates who have passed B.Sc. General (group 'B') vide eligibility condition 3.2 B(ia) and then in order of marks of those who have passed the Pre-medical examination vide eligibility condition 3.2 B(i-b). In other words for preparing merit list, according to eligibility conditions prescribed in the prospectus for the year 1971-72, no provision has been made in respect of candidates who have passed the Pre-medical or equivalent examination in the second attempt or improved their performance at a subsequent examination, by lowering the percentage of total marks by 3 per cent obtained at the last examination. It was vehemently urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that although the petitioner could not come on the merit list of the M.B.B.S. course for the year 1970-71 yet he was offered seats in dither courses during the said year which he did not join and preferred to improve his. performance in the second attempt to qualify for admission to the M.B.B.S. course in the Medical College during the academic year 1971-72. Having held out, goes the argument, the promise that in case if the petitioner improved his performance in the second attempt he would, qualify for admission to the M.B.B.S. course in the College the authorities are estopped by principle of promissory estoppel, from omitting to give him the benefit of rule 3.4B(iii a) as contained in the prospectus for the year 1970-71, and the authorities are bound to take into consideration the percentage of 74% marks obtained by the petitioner in the Inter Science examination held by the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.) Bhopal. According to the said rule, it was submitted, the percentage of total marks has to be lowered by 3 per cent only and after making allowance for that the aggregate percentage Of the petitioner stood at 71^ and on the strength of this percentage the petitioner was entitled to be admitted against the 100 seats to the M.B.B.S. course and that the admission to the petitioner has been denied on wholly illegal, unjustified and in an arbitrary manner. It was further submitted that the petitioner because of the promise held out in the prospectus for the year 1970-71 had not availed of admission which was being offered to him for other courses and thus his prospects were affected, he preferred to prosecute studies for Inter Science examination and has as a matter of fact passed the same with distinction getting 74% marks. Thus, it was contended, the petitioner changed his position because of the promise held out to him in the prospectus and now that he had improved his marks in an equivalent examination which is recognised by the Delhi University there is no valid reason as to why he should be refused admission against one of the 100 seats reserved for Delhi students. It was further submitted that during the prevalence of the representation, i.e., till April, 1971 it was not open to the authorities to change the conditions of admission. Support for this contention was drawn from case Union of India and others v. M/s. Angle Afghan , Agencies, Air 1968 S.C. 718. In that case a scheme called the Export Promotion Scheme was published by the Textile Commissioner on 10th October, 1962. In the scheme certain incentives were pro- vided to the exports of woollen goods, and the scheme provided for granting certificates to import material of the 'value equal to 100% of the f.o.b. value of the goods exported.' The respondents under . the scheme in September, 1963, exported to Afghanistan woollen goods of the f.o.b. value of Rs. 5,05,471.73 nP. However, the Textile Commissioner Bombay issued an import entitlement certificate to the respondents for Rs. 1,99,459.00 only. The respondents contended that they were entitled to the grant of import entitlement certificate for the full f.o.b. valise of the goods exported by them. The scheme provided that in case where the Textile Commissioner considers that the declared value of the goods exported was higher than the real Value of the goods, the matter be investigated further by calling for evidence such as purchase vouchers and other corroborative evidence to facilitate scrutiny. The Textile Commissioner on the basis of enquiry was competent to assess the correct value of the goods exported and issue an entitlement certificate on the basis of such assessed value. The Textile Commissioner in that case made no such enquiry but on a 'subjective satisfaction' held that the respondent had 'over invoiced' the goods and consequently issued import entitlement certificate of the lesser value as already indicated above. One of the contentions urged on behalf of the Union of India in the Supreme Court was that export promotion scheme was administrative in character and the promise held out that the exporters will be entitled to import certificate equal to 100 % of the f.o.b. value of the goods exported, was in the nature of instructions issued by the Government of India to the Textile Commissioner and the said instructions created no right in favor of the respondents. Correspondingly no obligation was cast upon the Government to issue the import certificate equal to 100% of the f.o.b. value of the exports. On facts the Court found that the Textile Commissioner while passing the impugned order did not hold any enquiry and did not allow any opportunity to the respondents to substantiate their contention that they had exported woollen goods of the f.o.b. value of Rs. 5,03,471.73 nP. On the facts and circumstances of the above-cited case their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed at page 726 as follows: -

We old that the claim of the respondents is appropriately founded upon the equity which arises in their favor as a result of the representation made on behalf of the Union of India in the Export Promotion scheme, and the action taken by the respondents acting upon that representation under the belief that the Government would carry out the representation made by it. On the facts proved in this case, no ground has been suggested before the Court for exempting the Government from the equity arising out of the acts done by the exporters to their prejudice relying upon the representation.'

(15) In the above-cited case the Court was of the opinion that the order dated 10thoctober, 1962, whereby the Export Promotion Scheme was published was legislative in character. The Court further observed that even granting that the order in question was of an executive character, the Courts have power in appropriate cases to compel performance of the obligation imposed by the schemes upon the departmental authorities. The above cited authority is not helpful to the petitioner in the instant case. Firstly, no promise was held out to the petitioner that in case if he improves his marks his name will be included in the merit list and that he shall be entitled to admission in the College. Secondly, in improving his marks it cannot be said that the petitioner has changed his position to his prejudice as a result whereof an obligation is cast upon the respondents to admit him to the M.B.B.S. course. We have carefully examined the prospectus issued by the respondents for the College for the year 1970-71. There can be no doubt that on the cover page of the prospectus it is clearly stated

(16) 'COLLEGE prospectus for the year 1970-71' which leaves no manner of doubt that the various rules incorporated in the prospectus were operative for the said academic year only. Besides, we cannot forget to take note of the fact that according to rule 10 of prospectus for the year 1970-71 the College reserves the right to alter the prospectus and terms and conditions at any time and such alteration will be binding on the students and that the prospectus is not a legal document. The authorities having specifically reserved the power to alter the prospectus and the terms and conditions, no candidate can make a grievance that in the subsequent years the terms and conditions have been changed. Besides, .it is well settled principle that the Government which foots the financial burden of running the Government Colleges, is entitled to prescribe the terms and conditions for admission in its Colleges including the source from which the admissions are to be made. In this view of the matter it was permissible to the authorities to change the prospectus for the year 1971-72 by prescribing one of the conditions of eligibility to the effect that the candidate must ha.ve passed Pre-medical examination from Delhi University in 1st Class in first attempt after passing the Higher Secondary (three years course) from the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, or Indian School Certificate from a school located in Delhi as a regular student. We cannot also lose sight of the fact that technical colleges such as Medical Colleges are setup with a view to meet the needs of a particular State in which these are set up and the authorities have the right to lay down the criteria on the basis of which they will grant admissions to various candidates. We, thereforee, see no merit in this contention.

(17) According to section 30 of the Delhi University Act (Act Viii of 1922) Ordinances can be issued regulating the admission of students to the University and their enrolment as such. According to Ordinance Ii (1) the Medical Courses Admission Committee shall consist of Dean Faculty of Medical Sciences, the Principals of Medical Colleges and two members appointed by the Academic Council and according to Ordinance II(4) the said Committee shall determine the principles on which the admissions are to be made subject to the review of Standing Committee of the Academic Council. The said Committees has to finalise the cases of admission except those which are to be referred to the Standing Committee on account of any special factors. According to Ordinance 11(5) the Standing Committee of the Academic Council will review ordinarily in November each year the principles adopted by the various Courses Admission Committees for admissions to the courses concerned and to co-ordinate, wherever necessary, the admission procedure adopted by these Committees. Thus the Standing Committee of the Academic Council by virtue of the Ordinances has the power to review in November each year the principles adopted by the various Courses Admission Committees and prescribe terms and conditions for the purpose of admission. The learned counsel for the respondents during the course of arguments produced copy of resolution dated the 17th February, 1968, whereby sub-clause (1) of clause 4 of Ordinance Ii has further been amended as a result of which where the number of eligible applicants for the course is greater than the number of seats available, weightage in preparing the merit list has to be given to such candidates who have passed the qualifying examination in a single attempt and it is on the basis of this that in the conditions of eligibility for 100 seats reserved for Delhi students in the prospectus for the yearl971-72 preference has been given to such candidates who have passed Premedical examination from Delhi University in 1st Class in first attempt after passing the Higher Secondary (three year course) from Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, or Indian School Certificate from a school located in Delhi as a regular student. The Ordinances and the Statutes, thereforee enable the Academic Council to provide for a change in the terms and conditions for admitting students to the Medical College. The Registrar of University of Delhi in his affidavit has affirmed that the necessary changes in the Rules for admission were proposed in consultation with the Delhi Administration and Central Government by the Medical Courses Admission Committee constituted under Ordinance Ii clause I, sub-clause (1) of the Delhi University Act by its resolution No. 2, dated the 19th February, 1971 and the said proposals were duly approved by the Academic Council which is the highest Academic authority of the University by its resolution No. 39, dated the 9th April, 1971 and the changes so proposed, were duly incorporated and notified in the prospectus of the College for the year 1971-72. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon Bench decision of this Court in Miss Sarita Munjal and another's v. Dr. (Miss) M. Chaudhuri and three others (Civil Writ No. 1265 of 1967) decide on the 24th November, 1967 (2) in which it was held that the Medical Courses Admission Committee was not competent to make changes in the rules for admission to the College as the said Committee is neither an officer of the University nor an authority of the University. The decision of that case is distinguishable as in the case before us the averment of the Registrar of Delhi University is that the changes in the rules for admission were proposed in consultation with the Delhi Administration and the Central Government by the Medical Courses Admission Committee and the said proposals were duly approved by the Academic Council by its resolution No. 39, dated 9th April, 1971, as already stated above, and that the Academic Council is the highest academic authority of the University and is competent lo make necessary changes in the rules for admission. Statute No. Viii of the Statues of the University provides for a Academic Council consisting of various persons enumerated therein and statute Viii provides for various powers to be exercised by the Academic Council, and section 17 of the Act states that the Academic Council is an authority of the University. Besides, as already noted above, change in the rule for admission has been made in consultation with the Delhi Administration and the Central Government and the Government which meets the expenses of the College, has a right to make the necessary changes.

(18) The second contention of the learned counsel to the effect that the change in the eligibility rule has been made by the Admission Committee which was not competent to do so, thereforee, is without merit.

(19) The third and last contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that no intelligible differentia can be found in giving a go-by to sub-rule(B) (iiia) of Rule 3.4 of rules for 1970-71 according to which while preparing a merit list the cases of candidates, like the petitioner, who have passed in the second attempt or improved their performance at a subsequent examination were considered but the percentage of total marks was lowered by 3 per cent obtained at the last examination and in substituting the said rule by clause (B) of Rule 3.2 in insisting that the candidate must have passed Pre-medical of the Delhi University in 1st class in the first attempt after passing the Higher Secondary (three year course) from the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, or the Indian School Certificate from a school located in Delhi as a regular student and that the said differentia is not rational in relation to the nexus sought to be achieved. The learned counsel based his contention on the ground that Delhi University had passed an Ordinance in the year 1952 for admission to the M.B.B.S. course and according to Ordinance 2(ii)(c) examination of the Board of Secondary Education (M.P.) Bhopal was approved as equivalent examination to the Pre-medical examination of the Delhi University. We see no force in this contention as well. In case D.N. ChancUa v. The State of Mysore and Ors., (Writ petition No.1618 of 1970) (3) decided by their Lord ships of the Supreme Court on 3rd May, 1971, the admission to the Medical Colleges was challenged on the ground that the rules provided University-wise distribution of seats and a contention was raised that it amounted to discriminations as it laid down classification which was neither based on any intelligible differentia nor has a rational nexus with the object of the rules. While repelling the contention the Court observed as follows:

'there can be no manner of doubt, and it is now .fairly well settled, that the Government, as also other private agencies, who found such centres for medical training, have the right to frame rules for admission so long as those rules are not, inconsistent with the University statutes and regulations and do not suffer from infirmities, constitutional or otherwise. Since the Universities are set up for satisfying the educational needs of different areas where they are set up and medical colleges are established in those areas, it can safely be presumed that they also were so set up to satisfy the needs for medical training of those attached to those universities. In our view, there is nothing undesirable in ensuring that those attached to such universities have their ambitions to have training in specialised subjects, like medicine, satisfied through colleges affiliated to their own universities.

(20) The fact that a candidate having lesser marks might obtain admission at the cost of another having higher marks from another universities does not necessarily mean that a less meritorious candidate gets advantage over a more meritorious one. As is well known different universities have different standards in the examination held by them. A preference to one attached to one university in its own institutions for post-graduate of technical training is not uncommon. Rules giving such a preference are to be found in various universities. Such a system for that reason alone is not to be condemned as discriminatory, particularly when admission to such a university by passing a qualifying examination held by it is not precluded by any restrictive qualifications such as birth or residence, or any other similar restrictions.

Further, the Government which bears the financial burden of running the Government Colleges is entitled to lay down criteria for admission in its own Colleges and to decide the sources from which admission would be made, provided of course, such classification is not arbitrary and has a rational basis and a reasonable connection with the object of the rules.'

(21) The Medical College was set up by the Central Government with a view to meet the needs of students of Delhi as also for certain other categories of candidates. The Government, thereforee, is well within its right to lay down the criteria for admission to the College and the Government and the Academic Council of the University preferred to reserve 100 seats for Delhi candidates who have passed B.Sc. General (Group 'B') examination from the Delhi University in first Division after passing the Pre-medical examination of the University or for candidates who have passed Pre-medical examination of the Delhi University in 1st Class in the first attempt after passing Higher Secondary (three year course) of the Central Board of Education. New Delhi, or the Indian School Certificate from a school located in Delhi as a regular student. The said criteria cannot be challenged as the same does not differentiate candidates on grounds of religion, race, caste or language etc. The criteria has been prescribed with a view to meet the requirements of the students from Delhi to provide facilities for medical education. That being so, it can not be urged that the criteria prescribed for admission has no rational nexus with the object of imparting medical education or of selection for the said purpose. Argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the last candidate selected against the 100 seats reserved for Delhi students, had secured 69.5 per cent marks, where as the petitioner had secured 74 per cent marks and lowering the same- by 3 per cent the petitioner would obviously be a better choice as compared to the last candidate; cannot be accepted because the basis of the criteria lies in the preference to the candidates passing examinations from the Delhi University and in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in D.N. Chanchla'scase 3(supra) we are unable to sustain the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this respect.

(22) For the reasons stated above the writ petition is dismissed but with no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //