Ms. Randeep Kaur vs State of Punjab and Others

R.S. Mongia, J.—This writ petition was filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to the respondents to admit her in the Ist Year of M.B.B.S./B.D.S. Course in the session 1992-93, against the seats reserved for the children/wards of serving para-military personnel. The facts giving rise to the present petition may be noticed.

The respondents conducted a joint P.M.T. test for making admissions to the M.B.B.S./B.D.S. Course (1992-93 session) in the three State run Medical Colleges in the State of Punjab. The admissions to these Colleges are regulated by the State of Punjab and for the session 1992-93, the Government Medical College, Amritsar, was the Institution, which was to accept the admission forms from the students who had qualified in the entrance examination conducted by the State of Punjab, through the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. In the P.M.T. test held in July, 1992, the petitioner secured 82 marks and was consequently, eligible for seeking admission to M.B.B.S./B.D.S. Course. The total number of seats for the M.B.B.S. course in the three Medical Colleges at Patiala, Amritsar and Faridkot were 350 and in the two Dental Colleges at Amrtisar and Patiala, there were 80 seats for the B.D.S. course. 15% of the total seats were to be filled in on All India basis through a test to be conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. According to the brochure issued by the respondent-University, 1% of seats were reserved by the children/wards of serving Para-Military Personnel. Accordingly, three seats in this category were reserved for M.B.B.S. and one seat for the B.D.S. course. The petitioner was a candidate from this category.

It is the case of the petitioner that though the result of the P.M.T. test of the petitioner was declared and she had obtained 82 marks, she, however, did not receive her detailed marks Result Card from the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar till 24th July, 1992. The petitioner along with her parents went to the Government Medical College, Amritsar on 24th July, 1992 to submit her admission forms, which was the last date for submission of forms. According to the averments made in the petition, the Authorities in the Government Medical College, Amritsar, refused to accept the admission forms on the plea that the same did not accompany the detailed marks Result Card of the P.M.T. examination. It has been alleged that the petitioner explained to the Authorities that she had not received the same and requested that her admission forms be accepted and she would get duplicate detailed marks Result Card from the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. However, her forms for admission to M.B.B.S./B.D.S. were not accepted. Further, according to the petitioner, she applied for a duplicate detailed marks Result card to the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, on 24th July, 1992 itself, which was made available to her on 4th August, 1992, but when she submitted the forms for M.B.B.S./B.D.S. on 4th August, 1992, the same were not accepted on the plea that last date for the receipt of forms had since expired. This led the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

The respondents have denied that the petitioner ever applied for admission. On my asking the learned counsel for the petitioner to produce any document to show that the petitioner had applied for duplicate detailed marks Result card from the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, on 24th July, 1992, he has produced a carbon copy of a letter addressed to the Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, duly received by the University on 24th July, 1992, requesting for the supply of duplicate detailed marks Result Card. That letter has been kept on the record and marked ''X'' be me.

According to the petitioner''s counsel, the forms were not accepted by the respondent-Authorities and it may be difficult for her to prove by any direct evidence that in fact she had gone to submit her forms on 24th July, 1992. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the very fact that the petitioner had obtained two admission forms, one for M.B.B.S. and the other for B.D.S. and also had applied for the duplicate detailed marks Result card on 24th July, 1992, which, according to him, is apparent from letter marked ''X'' and further fact that the petitioner again went to submit the application forms on 4th August, 1992, for being admitted, should be sufficient to hold that the petitioner did go to apply for admission to M.B.B.S./B.D.S. course. He further submitted that in fact there was no legal requirement to attach the detailed marks Result card, inasmuch as the total marks in the P.M.T. test, which are mentioned in the Gazette, was already with the respondents.

The learned counsel for the respondents also could not satisfy me as to why it was required that detailed marks Result card should be attached with the admission forms. The admission to M.B.B.S./B.D.S. was dependent on the total marks obtained in the P.M.T. test. From the facts noticed above, I am of the view that petitioner''s forms should have been accepted provisionally even if there was requirement of detailed marks Result card. Further, from the facts which could have been supplied later on, it appears that the petitioner did go to submit her forms.

Now the question that arises is that if the petitioner had gone for admission on 24th July, 1992, what relief can now be granted to her. From the facts which have emerged from the written statement, three candidates of the category of the petitioner have already been admitted in the M.B.B.S. course, who were higher in merit than the petitioner. The petitioner cannot have any claim for admission to M.B.B.S. in the reserved category. No statement of the category of the petitioner has been admitted for the B.D.S. course in which one seat was reserved for the said category. By now, the students who were admitted in the 1992-93 session have almost completed the session and it will be too late in the day to direct the respondents to admit the petitioner in B.D.S. in the reserved category. In these circumstances, I am of the view that if the petitioner applies for admission to the B.D.S. Course for the session 1993-94, and there are seats reserved in the B.D.S. Course, For the category of children/wards of the serving para-military personnel, then the petitioner may be considered for admission in the same reserved category for admission to the B.D.S. course on the basis of marks obtained by her in the P.M.T. test held in the year 1992 without requiring her to appear afresh for admission to the B.D.S. course in the reserved category. This is being done as for no fault of the petitioner, she was not considered for admission to the B.D.S. course.

For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed to the extent that if the petitioner applies for admission to the B.D.S. course in the session 1993-94 and there are seats reserved for the category of children/wards of the serving Para-military personnel, then the case of the petitioner would be considered by the respondents on merits for admission to B.D.S. course in that category on the basis of marks obtained by the petitioner in the P.M.T. test held in the yar 1992. It may be clarified that if there are candidates higher in merit than the petitioner in the said category, then the petitioner would not get admission in the B.D.S. course in the session 1993-94. I make no order as to costs.