http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 6  

PETITIONER: DR. MRS. SHEELA ASHOK PATWARDHAN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DEAN, DR. V.M. MEDICAL COLLEGE, SOLAPUR, & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT24/11/1988

BENCH: DUTT, M.M. (J) BENCH: DUTT, M.M. (J) NATRAJAN, S. (J)

CITATION:  1989 AIR  382            1988 SCR  Supl. (3) 959  1989 SCC  (3) 362        JT 1988 (4)   513  1988 SCALE  (2)1460

ACT:      Professional Colleges--Rules regulating appointment  of Housemen and House-Surgeons at the hospitals attached to the Govt. Medical Colleges in State of Maharashtra--Rule  X(2)-- M.D.  Course--Admission to Eligibility of M.B.B.S.  graduate from A.P. State.

HEADNOTE:      Rule  X(2) of the Rules regulating the appointments  of Housemen and House-Surgeons at the hospitals attached to the Government  Medical  Colleges in the  State  of  Maharashtra provides  that  the Government  may  sanction  supernumerary posts to allow spouses of Government servants on transfer to undertake  studies, if standing high in merit, from  another college.      The  appellant married to a Government Medical  Officer working  in  the State of Maharashtra  after  having  passed M.B.B.S. examination and completing one year internship from a  college situated in the State of Andhra Pradesh.  On  her application,  the Government of Maharashtra in  exercise  of its power under rule X(2) created a Housepost in  Obstetrics and  Gynaecology  w.e.f.  July  l5.  1986  specifically  and categorically  stating that the supernumerary Housepost  was created  to  enable  the appellant  to  complete  her  post- graduate  studies  at  Dr. V.M.  Medical  College,  Solapur, respondent  No.  2. The appellant joined the  Housepost  and duly completed the same. However, she was refused  admission in  the M.D. Course by respondent  No.2 inasmuch as she  was not even issued an application form.      Being aggrieved, she filed a writ petition in the  High Court  challenging  the  legality  of  the  action  of   the respondent  refusing to admit her in the said  post-graduate M.D.  Course.  The High Court dismissed  the  writ  petition holding,  inter alia, that no inference could be drawn  that everybody  who completed the house-job was entitled  to  get admission  to the post-graduate cousre ipso facto  and  that granting  of registration for house-job would not amount  to admission to the post-graduate course in a Medical  College. Hence this appeal by special leave.        Allowing the appeal,                                                   PG NO 959

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 6  

                                                 PG NO 960      HELD:  (l)  All the seats in the  post-graduate  degree course  for Obstetrics and Gynaecology are not reserved  for the  candidates  passing the M.B.B.S. examination  from  the said  Dr.  V.M.  Medical College. It is  not  disputed  that certain percentage of seats are reserved for the students of the  College.  But, no application form was  issued  to  the appellant and accordingly, the question of not admitting the appellant  on  the  ground of  institutional  preference  or institutional reservation of seats does not arise. [964F-G]      (2) The State of Maharashtra is entitled to  refuse  to admit any student passing the M.B.B.S. examination from  any Medical College in the State of Andhra Pradesh as that State has  not  reciprocated in the matter of admission  to  post- graduate  degree courses in Medical Colleges of that  State. [964G-H]      (3)  The  State of Maharashtra  after  considering  all facts  and  circumstances including the high  merit  of  the appellant specifically created a supernumerary Housepost for the  appellant. After creating the  supernumerary  Housepost specifically for the appellant so as to enable her to become eligible   for   the  post  graduate  degree   course,   the respondents are not at all justified in refusing her even an application  form  and  in  not  considering  her  case  for admission  in the post-graduate degree course on the  ground of  failure of reciprocity by the Andhra Pradesh  State.  It was, therefore, unreasonable and unjust for the  respondents to  refuse admission to the appellant on a ground  which  is not  at  all tenable in the facts and circumstances  of  the cases. [965C-F]      (4) Normally the Supreme Court does ot interfere in the matter   of   admission  of  students  in   an   educational institution. Even if it interferes. it generally directs the authorities concerned to consider the question of  admission in accordance with the rules of the institution. But, in the peculiar  facts and circumstances of the case,  particularly the  fact  that the appellant had to lose two years  of  her academic  career for no fault of hers, it is  directed  that the  respondents shall issue to her an application form  for admission in the post-graduate M.D. Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and that alter the submission of the application form and compliance with other formalities by the appellant, she  shall  be  admitted  in  the  post-graduate  course  in Obstetrics  and  Gynaecology in Dr.  V.M.  Medical  College, Solapur, in the 1989 session, provided she is not  otherwise unfit. [966B-D]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4128  of 1988.                                                   PG NO 961      From  the  Judgment  and Order dated  3.8.1988  of  the Bombay High Court in W.P. NO. 28 of 1987.      V.N. Ganpule and Mukul Mudgal for the Appellant.      A.S.  Bhasme, B.R. Agarwala and Mrs.  Sushma  Manchanda for the Respondents.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      DUTT,  J. Special leave granted. Heard learned  Counsel for both the parties.      The  appeal  is directed against the  judgment  of  the Bombay High Court whereby the High Court dismissed the  writ petition  of  the  appellant challenging,  inter  alia,  the legality of the action of the respondents refusing to  admit

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 6  

the appellant in the post-graduate M.D. Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology for the 1987 session.      The  appellant  passed the MBBS  examination  from  the Kakatiya  Medical College under the University of  Kakatiya. Warangal, in the State of Andhra Pradesh. She obtained  72%, 66.63%  and 67.5% marks in the first, second and third  MBBS examinations.  She was awarded Governor’s Gold Medal by  the State of Andhra Pradesh for her consistent high merit at the MBBS  examinations. In August, 1985, she completed  her  one year internship.      She  married  one Dr. Ashok  Patwardhan,  a  Government Medical Officer working in the State of Maharashtra. He  was transferred  to Solapur in January, 1985. The appellant  had to  come to Solapur in October, 1985 and since then she  has been residing there with her husband.      After coming to Solapur, she intended to prosecute  her studies   in  the  post-graduate  M.D.  Degree   Course   in Obstetrics  and  Gynaecology in Dr.  V.H.  Medical  College, Solapur, under the Shivaji University, the respondent No. 2. Rules X(2) and (3) of the Rules regulating the  appointments of  Housemen and House-Surgeons at the hospital attached  to the Government Medical Colleges in the State of Maharashtra, hereinafter referred to as ’the Rules’. provide as follows:       "X....................................................       ......................................................                                                   PG NO 962     Government  have from time to time  sanctioned  supernu- merary posts--      (1)....................................................      .....................      (2) to allow spouses of Government servants on transfer to      undertake studies, if standing high in merit  (which means  not  less than 55% at first attempt in  the  subject) from another college;      (3) to allow students of other colleges in  Maharashtra to compete on merit for posts so as to conduct post-graduate course for which facilities are not existant or very  meagre in  their own college. These supernumerary posts  should  be awarded  after fullest consideration of these principles  in the above order and on merit and it is not incumbent to fill all of them or to reserve them ............................. It  is  understood that granting of  registration  does  not absolve a candidate from competing on merit and if he cannot earn post on merit, his registration would lapse for failure to compete housemanship requirements ..................."     The  appellant made an application to the Government  of Maharashtra  praying  for  the creation of  a  Housepost  in Obstetrics  and Gynaecology under rule X(2) so as to  enable her to do post-graduate studies in Dr. V.M. Medical College, Solapur.  As  she fulfilled and requirements of  rule  X(2), namely,  that  she is the wife of a  Government  servant  on transfer and that she stood high in merit securing more than 55%  marks  in  Obstetrics  and  Gynaecology  in  her   MBBS examination,   the   Dean  of   the   College   specifically recommended   her   case  for  the  creation   of   such   a supernumerary  Housepost.  While  the  application  of   the appellant   was  under  consideration,  the  appellant   was selected for a Housepost in Surgery in the said College. She joined  the  Housepost  in  Surgery  in  January,  ]986  and completed  the  same  in July, 1986. But,  in  order  to  be eligible   for  post-graduate  studies  in  Obstetrics   and Gynaecology, she was to join another Housepost in Obstetrics and Gynaecology.      On  July  2,  1986, the Government  of  Maharashtra  in exercise of its power under rule X(2) created a Housepost in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 6  

Obstetrics  and Gynaecology with effect from July  15,  1986 specifically    and   categorically   stating    that    the                                                   PG NO 963 supernumerary Housepost was created to enable the  appellant to  complete her post-graduate studies at Dr.  V.M.  Medical College,  Solapur. The Government resolution dated  July  2, 1986 is extracted below:      "Government  hereby grants permission for  creation  of one  supernumerary  non-stipendary  post  of  Houseman  with effect  from  15.7.1986 for a period of six  months  at  Dr. Vaishampayan  Memorial Medical College, Solapur,  to  enable Dr.  Mrs.  S.A.  Patwardhan to complete  her  Post  Graduate Course in the subject of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.      Mrs.  Patwardhan  should join the said post  within  10 days  from  15.7.1986. In the event of her not  joining  the said post will be treated as abolished.      By   order  and  in  the  name  of  the   Governor   of Maharashtra.                                                        Sd/-                                                J.P. Budhwant                                             Deputy Secretary                                        Govt. of Maharashtra"      The  Dean of the College called upon the  appellant  to join  the  Housepost  and  not  to  quit  the  same   before completing   the   term  inasmuch  as  the   Housepost   was specifically created to enable the appellant to complete her post-graduate studies at Dr. V.M. Medical College,  Solapur. The  appellant joined the Housepost and duly  completed  the same.  The  Dean  of the  College  issued  an  advertisement inviting applications for the post-graduate seats in various disciplines  for January, 1987 batch. The appellant made  an application praying for the issuance of an application  form for  the M.D. Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology,  but  no such  form was issued to her. In other words, the  appellant was refused admission in the M.D. Course at Dr. V.M. Medical College, Solapur.      Being  aggrieved  by  the action of  the  Dean  of  the College,  the appellant filed a writ petition in the  Bombay High Court. The High Court, as stated already, dismissed the writ  petition holding, inter alia, that no inference  could be  drawn  that everybody who completed  the  house-job  was entitled  to get admission to the post-graduate course  ipso                                                   PG NO 964 facto and that granting of registration for house-job  would not  amount  to admission to the post-graduate course  in  a Medical College. Hence this appeal.      There  can  be no doubt that there is  no  question  of automatic  admission  in the  post-graduate  course,  simply because one has completed the house-job or housemanship.  It is  not the case of the appellant that as she completed  the housemanship,   she  has  acquired  a  right  of   automatic admission  to  the post-graduate degree course in  the  said College.  Her  complaint is that she was not even  given  an application  form for the post-graduate degree  course.  The College  authorities  or  the  University  did  not  at  all consider  her  case for admission. The High  Court  has  not considered this aspect of the appellant’s case.      It  is  contended by the learned Counsel  appearing  on behalf  of the respondents that in view of the provision  in the  Rules giving institutional preference in the matter  of admission,  the appellant could not be admitted.  The  other ground  that has been urged on behalf of the respondents  is that  as the appellant passed the MBBS examination from  the Kakatiya  University in the State of Andhra Pradesh  and  as there is failure on the part of the State of Andhra  Pradesh

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 6  

to  reciprocate  with regard to reservation of  25%  of  the total  number of seats in the matter of admission  to  post- graduate  degree course in Medical Science, the  respondents were justified in refusing admission to the appellant.      So far as the first contention is concerned, we do  not think that there is any merit in the same. All the seats  in the   post-graduate   degree  course   in   Obstetrics   and Gynaecology are not reserved for the candidates passing  the MBBS  examination  from the said Dr. V.M.  Medical  College, Solapur. It is not disputed that certain percentage of seats are  reserved  for  the students of  the  College.  But,  no application   form   was  issued  to  the   appellant   and, accordingly, the question of not admitting the appellant  on the  ground  of institutional  preference  or  institutional reservation  of  seats does not arise. In our  opinion,  the first ground founded on institutional preference seems to be a  mere plea. The real ground for refusal to issue  even  an application  form  for  admission to the  appellant  is  the failure  of reciprocity on the part of the State  of  Andhra Pradesh.  The  State  of Maharashtra,  in  our  opinion,  is entitled  to  refuse to admit any student passing  the  MBBS examination from any Medical College in the State of  Andhra Pradesh, as that State has not reciprocated in the matter of admission   to  post-graduate  degree  courses  in   Medical Colleges of that State. But, in the facts and  circumstances                                                   PG NO 965 of  the  present  case,  the  respondents  are  not  at  all justified  in  refusing  to  admit  the  appellant  in   the postgraduate  degree course. The most glaring fact  in  this respect   is  that  on  the  prayer  of  the   appellant   a supernumerary  Housepost  was created so as  to  enable  the appellant  to become eligible for the  post-graduate  degree course. It is not the case of the respondents that they were not aware of the fact that the appellant had passed her MBBS examination  from a Medical College in the State  of  Andhra Pradesh.  Indeed, it has been categorically averred  by  the appellant  that  in her application for the  creation  of  a supernumerary  Housepost, she disclosed all facts  including the  fact of her passing the MBBS examination from the  said Medical College in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The State of Maharashtra  after considering all facts  and  circumstances including  the  high  merit of  the  appellant  specifically created  a supernumerary Housepost for the appellant.  After the  appellant had completed her house-job and  applied  for the  issuance of an application form for  the  post-graduate degree   course,  she  was  refused  an  application   form, presumably  on  the  ground that she  had  passed  her  MBBS examination  from a Medical College in the State  of  Andhra Pradesh.  In our opinion, the appellant could be refused  at the  very  outset,  that  is to  say,  her  application  for creation  of a supernumerary Housepost could be turned  down on the ground of failure to observe reciprocity by the State of  Andhra  Pradesh. But, after creating  the  supernumerary Housepost specifically for the appellant so as to enable her to  become eligible for the post-graduate degree course  the respondents,  in  our opinion, are not at all  justified  in refusing her even an application form and in not considering her  case for admission to post-graduate degree  course,  on the  ground of failure of reciprocity by the Andhra  Pradesh State. We fail to understand how the College authorities and the  Government  could  take this attitude  so  far  as  the appellant is concerned. In our opinion, it was  unreasonable and  unjust for the respondents to refuse admission  to  the appellant  on  a ground which is not at all tenable  in  the facts and circumstances of the case.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 6  

    It  is  not  disputed that the appellant  has  all  the requisite qualifications for admission in the  post-graduate degree  course.  She  applied to admission  in  the  session commencing from January, 1987, but she was not admitted. The 1988 sessions has also passed, as the appellant had to  file a  writ petition before the High Court of Bombay  which,  as noticed  already,  was  dismissed by  the  High  Court.  The appellant  prays  that  she may be  admitted  in  the  post- graduate  course  in Dr. V.M. Medical College in  the   1989 session.                                                   PG NO 966      The  facts stated above reveal that the  appellant  has been harassed to a great extent. She was misled by the  fact of the creation of a supernumerary Housepost for her by  the State of Maharashtra. She has already lost two years of  her academic career. Normally, this Court does not interfere  in the  matter  of  admission of  students  in  an  educational institution. Even if it interferes, it generally directs the authorities concerned to consider the question of  admission in accordance with the rules of the institution. But, in the peculiar   facts   and   circumstances  of   the   case, particularly the fact that the appellant had    to lose  two years of her academic career for no fault of hers, we direct the  respondens  to  issue to her an  application  form  for admission in the post-graduate M.D. Course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology  and  we     further  direct  that  after  the submission of the application form and compliance with other formalities  by the appellant, she shall be admitted in  the post-graduate  course in Obstetrics and Gynaecology  in  Dr. V.M. Medical College, Solapur, in the 1989 session, provided she is not otherwise unfit. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Indian Medical Council also supports the  case of the appellant for her admission in the 1989 session.      The  judgment  of the High Court is set aside  and  the appeal  is allowed. There will, however, be no order  as  to costs.      M.L.A.                              Appeal allowed.