Et Report
Jammu, Oct 2: In a letters patent appeal filed by Acharya Shri Chander College of Medical Sciences and Hospital against the interim order of writ court, Division Bench of High Court comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice Janak Raj Kotwal modified the interim direction and instead of reserving one seat ordered that entire selection process shall remain subject to outcome of the writ petition filed by the petitioner Sourav Goel.
The DB after hearing senior advocate Sunil Sethi assisted by advocate Ravi Abrol for the appellant and senior advocate DC Raina assisted by advocates Arun Kumar and Ananta Raina for Sourav Goel and adv Anil Sethi appearing for the Board of Professional Entrance Examinations (BOPEE), observed that common ground of both the sides before the writ court is that respondent has challenged notification No 32-BOPEE of 2013 dated August 5, 2013, which pertains to short listing of candidates found eligible for undergoing MBBS, BDS, BAMS, BUMS, Physiotherapy and Diploma in Dental Hygiene Session, 2013.
The petitioner has assailed the said notification mainly on the ground that for the Common Entrance Test (CET), the answer key as provided by the respondents contains various incorrect options besides other irregularities. The petitioner has, therefore, also sought direction to the respondents for selecting him for the course of MBBS for the session 2013-2014. Writ Court, as ad interim measure, vide order dated 02.09.2013 has issued a direction to the effect that "respondents shall reserve one seat of MBBS Course of Session 2013-14".
Aggrieved by the interim direction, appellant ASCOMS submitted that pursuant to the said direction, respondent No. 1 has blocked one seat of MBBS Course in the appellant-Institute
Sunil Sethi appearing on behalf of appellant sought to demonstrate that direction of the writ court if allowed the continue will result into the above said reserved seat getting wasted because it would not be possible to fill up the said seat as the judgment issued by Apex Court.
The DB further observed that having heard counsel for the parties, it is of the view that if plea of the Goel sustains in the writ court, likely result may affect the entire selection process and in that case, reserving one seat will be neither feasible nor useful. "Interest of the writ petitioner in the writ petition rather can be well guarded if entire selection process is made subject to outcome of the writ petition," with these observations the DB admitted and disposed of the appeal by modifying the interim direction issued by the writ court. (JNF) |
