MD/MS aspirants move High Court, Chandigarh Admn put on notice
Chandigarh, August 10
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today issued notice of motion to the Chandigarh Administration and other respondents on a petition seeking directions for quashing a clause in the prospectus for admission to MD/MS-session 2023 issued by Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32.
Among other things, the petitioners contended before the Division Bench of Justice Arun Palli and Justice Jagmohan Bansal that it was discriminatory and against the candidates eligible for both the institutional preference (IP) and UT Chandigarh pool quotas in the counselling for MD/MS courses. The matter was placed before the Bench after a petition was filed against the Administration and other respondents by Shubham Jund and other petitioners through senior advocate Puneet Bali with counsels Vibhav Jain, Aditya Shioran and Razual Singh Purewal. Bali contended that the petitioners were MBBS graduates from GMCH-32 and were aspirants for admission to MD/MS courses in the same institution. As per the prospectus, 72 of 148 seats were allocated to all-India quota.
He added 10 reserved (SC), 62 general and four EWS seats were earmarked for the state quota, which was further divided into two categories.
The IP pool consists of 36 plus two EWS seats. The Chandigarh pool comprised 36 plus two EWS seats. The admissions against seats in both categories were made on the basis of marks scored by the candidates in NEET-PG from the combined merit list.
He submitted concededly the petitioners in terms of the eligibility conditions, having studied for five years in GMCH-32 were eligible to compete even in the UT pool. As per the process and sequence of counselling in vogue and being consistently followed for years, the candidates from IP pool could opt for a specialty/discipline/branch of their choice either in the UT pool or in the IP pool on the basis of their merit position.
But the Chandigarh Administration, vide its order dated August 4, 2023, carried out
a sudden alteration in the settled norms/practice. As of now, the IP pool candidate (referred to as IP+UT) was to be firstly adjusted against the seats of the preferred branch available in the IP pool.
If the preferred branch was unavailable in the IP pool, the candidate was to be considered for the branch of preferred choice under the UT pool subject to fulfilling its eligibility criteria. Bali submitted apparently the decision was not only unilateral but even arbitrary and “would severely impact the possibility of IP pool candidates to get the specialty/discipline of their choice”.
The contention
Petitioners claim the change in admission norms is discriminatory and against candidates eligible for both institutional preference (IP) and UT pool quotas
SC junks UT norm for sports quota admissions
- The SC has set aside the eligibility condition of 75% marks in qualifying examination prescribed by the UT Administration for admission in engineering courses under sports quota seats
- The verdict came on an appeal against the HC order filed by Dev Gupta, who was denied admission under sports quota as he had not secured 75 per cent marks in his Class XII examination
