EDUCATION PROMOTION SOCIETY FOR INDIA AND ANOTHER versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

[2019] 8 S.C.R.

AEDUCATION PROMOTION SOCIETY FOR INDIA ANDANOTHER

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 747 of 2019)

JUNE 21, 2019

[DEEPAK GUPTA AND SURYA KANT, JJ.]

Education/Educational Institutions – Extension of time forcarrying out counselling for P.G. courses – Petitioner no.1-Societysought extension of time for carrying out counselling for medicalCcolleges/deemed Universities, since large number of seats in thesecolleges for P.G. courses were lying vacant – Petitioner no.1 reliedon the orders passed by the Supreme Court on 11.10.2017 inMiscellaneous Application (M.A.) No. 1043 of 2017 in InterlocutoryApplication (I.A.) No.96448 of 2017 in W.P.(C)No. 743 of 2017Dwherein it was permitted to hold mop-up counselling for unfilledsuper-speciality seats lying vacant – Held: Petitioners sought ageneral extension of time not on account of any particular difficultyfaced by any individual college or university but generally on theground that large number of seats for P.G. courses were lyingvacant – Merely because the seats were lying vacant, is not groundEto grant extension of time and grant further opportunity to fill upvacant seats – The fixed time schedule to fill up seats must be followed– Insofar as order dated 11.10.2017 is concerned, it was related tosuper-speciality seats and Supreme Court had extended the datefor counselling on the request of the Central Government – Further,Fthe said order was only applicable to the said academic year – Inthe instant case, extension cannot be granted just because someseats were lying vacant without any justification.

Dismissing the appeal, the Court

HELD : 1. Except the orders in M.A. No.1043 of 2017 inGI.A.No. 96448 of 2017 in W.P. (C) No.743 of 2017, all the ordersare either state specific or college/university specific. They havebeen passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of eachparticular case and in most of the orders it is clearly mentionedthat the orders shall not be treated as precedent. As far as theorder dated 11.10.2017 is concerned it related to super-specialityH

seats and this Court on the request of the Central Governmentextended the date for counselling by 10 days from the date of theorder and further granted 4 days for the candidates to join. Theorder also clearly states that it is only applicable to the saidacademic year. [Para 5] [797-F-G]

2. In this case the petitioners want general extension oftime not on account of any particular difficulty faced by anyindividual college or university but generally on the ground thata large number of seats for the P.G. courses are lying vacant. Itis stated that more than 1000 seats are lying vacant. In theaffidavit filed by the UOI it is mentioned that as far as deemeduniversities are concerned there are 603 seats lying vacant.However, it is important to note that out of 603 seats lying vacantonly 31 are in clinical subjects and the vast majority (572) that isalmost 95% of the seats are lying vacant in non-clinical subjects.There is no material on record to show as to what is the situationwith regard to the remaining 400-500 seats. This Court howevercan take judicial notice of the fact that every year large numberof non-clinical seats remain vacant because many graduate doctorsdo not want to do post-graduation in non-clinical subjects. Merelybecause the seats are lying vacant, in our view, is not ground togrant extension of time and grant further opportunity to fill upvacant seats. The schedule must be followed. If this Court willpermit violation of schedule and grant extension, it will lead toopening Pandora’s box and the whole purpose of fixing timeschedule and laying down regime which strictly adheres to timeschedule will be defeated. [Para 6] [798-A-D]Mridul Dhar and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) andOrs (2005) 2 SCC 65 : [2005] 1 SCR 380 ; PriyaGupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. (2012) 7 SCC433 : [2012] 5 SCR 768 ; Ashish Ranjan and Ors. v.Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (2016) 11 SCC 225– referred to.

Case Law Reference

[2005] 1 SCR 380[2012] 5 SCR 768(2016) 11 SCC 225

referred toreferred toreferred to

Para 3Para 3Para 3

ACIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.747 of 2019.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India]

Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv., Devashish Bharuka, Ravi Bharuka, Advs.for the petitioners.B

Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG, Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Dr. NisheshSharma, Shubhendu Anand, Vaibhav Chadha, Gurmeet Singh Makker,Vivek Singh, Gaurav Sharma, Dhawal Mohan, Prateek Bhatia, Ms.Prassana Mohan, Advs. for the respondents.

CThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner no.1 Society whichclaims to represent large number of educational institutions includingmedical colleges running post-graduate (P.G.) medical courses, has prayedDthat this Court may grant extension of time to respective medical colleges/deemed universities for carrying out counselling for P.G. courses sincelarge number of seats in these colleges are lying vacant.

2. Shri Maninder Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitionersurges that these colleges have spent huge amount of money on theEinfrastructure of the colleges. He submits that there is an acute shortageof doctors in India and, in fact, the Union of India has permitted increaseof seats in government medical colleges without increase ofinfrastructure. According to him, this shows that the intention of theState is to ensure that more and more doctors pass out and treat thepatients. He also relied upon large number of orders wherein extensionFhas been granted in granting admission in medical colleges in graduatecourse, P.G. courses and super-speciality courses. He has specificallydrawn our attention to the orders passed by this Court on 11.10.2017 inMiscellaneous Application (M.A.) No.1043 of 2017 in InterlocutoryApplication (I.A.) No.96448 of 2017 in W.P.(C) No.743 of 2017, whereinGon the request of the Central Government the Director General of HealthServices (DGHS) was permitted to hold mop-up counselling for 553unfilled super-speciality seats lying vacant. He submits that similarorder may be passed in this case.

3. Shri Vikramjit Banerjee, learned ASG appearing for the UnionHof India has opposed the said application and submits that the sanctity of

the earlier orders passed by this Court in Mridul Dhar and Ors. vs.Union of India (UOI) and Ors[1] ; Priya Gupta vs. State ofChhattisgarh and Ors.[2] and Ashish Ranjan and Ors. vs. Union ofIndia (UOI) and Ors.[3], will be set at naught if the petition is allowed.

4. This Court in Mridul Dhar’s case (supra) noted that therewas no consistency in fixing the time schedule for admissions to medicalcolleges and discrepancies and irregularities in maintaining prescribedschedule were being exploited by many private medical colleges byadmitting undeserved students and charging high fees. This Courtreferred to the schedules notified by the Medical Council of India anddirected strict adherence of those schedules. This was reiterated inPriya Gupta’s case (supra). In Ashish Ranjan’s case (supra), this Courtspecifically gave its approval to the time schedule. The schedule asapproved by this Court provides that the declaration of result has to bedone by the end of January and the first round of counselling for AllIndia quota seats, deemed and central institutes has to be completed by24[th] March and state counselling should be completed by 5[th] April, secondround of counselling by 12[th] and 26[th] April respectively and mop-up roundby 8[th] May for state and the 22[nd] May for Deemed Universities andCentral Institutes. Last date of joining should be 31[st] May for deemedand central institutes and 18[th] May for the states. We have been informedthat this date has been extended to 31[st] May for states also. The datewas extended to 17.06.2019 for the State of Maharashtra, vide order ofthis Court, due to certain issues specific to the State of Maharashtra.

5. We have carefully gone through the orders relied upon by thepetitioners. Except the orders in M.A. No.1043 of 2017 in I.A.No.96448of 2017 in W.P.(C) No.743 of 2017, all the orders are either state specificor college/university specific. They have been passed in the peculiarfacts and circumstances of each particular case and in most of the ordersit is clearly mentioned that the orders shall not be treated as precedent.As far as the order dated 11.10.2017 is concerned it related to super-speciality seats and this Court on the request of the Central Governmentextended the date for counselling by 10 days from the date of the orderand further granted 4 days for the candidates to join. The order alsoclearly states that it is only applicable to the said academic year.

1 (2005) 2 SCC 65

2 (2012) 7SCC 433

3 2016 (11) SCC 225

A6. In this case the petitioners want general extension of time noton account of any particular difficulty faced by any individual college oruniversity but generally on the ground that large number of seats forthe P.G. courses are lying vacant. It is stated that more than 1000 seatsare lying vacant. In the affidavit filed by the UOI it is mentioned that asfar as deemed universities are concerned there are 603 seats lying vacant.BHowever, it is important to note that out of 603 seats lying vacant only31 are in clinical subjects and the vast majority (572) that is almost 95%of the seats are lying vacant in non-clinical subjects. There is no materialon record to show as to what is the situation with regard to the remaining400-500 seats. This Court however can take judicial notice of the factCthat every year large number of non-clinical seats remain vacant becausemany graduate doctors do not want to do post-graduation in non-clinicalsubjects. Merely because the seats are lying vacant, in our view, is nota ground to grant extension of time and grant further opportunity to fillup vacant seats. The schedule must be followed. If we permit violationof schedule and grant extension, we shall be opening Pandora’s boxDand the whole purpose of fixing time schedule and laying down aregime which strictly adheres to time schedule will be defeated.7. We may note that in the schedule prescribed, there are threerounds of counselling, the first round, the second round and the mop-upround. The mop-up round was to be completed by 31.5.2019 and ifEsome seats remain vacant even after the mop-up round it cannot behelped. Extension cannot be granted just because some seats are lyingvacant without there being any other justification.

8. We find no merit in this petition and the same is accordinglydismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

Ankit Gyan

Appeal dismissed.