Order
1. IAs Nos. 10 and 12 are allowed.
IAs Nos. 9 and 11
2. In substance the prayer in these applications is to set aside the impugned decision dated 16-8-2004 of Respondent 2 Committee, cancelling the examination conducted by the petitioner Association on 28-7-2004. Further prayer is to grant ad interim stay of the said decision.
3. The petitioner was permitted to conduct the examination to determine merit of candidates to be admitted in medical, dental and homeopathy courses, in terms of the order dated 23-7-2004. The examination was held on 28-7-2004. About 2300 students participated. On the basis of merit determined as a result of the said examination, according to the petitioner, admissions have been granted to 150 candidates in medical colleges, 90 candidates in dental colleges and 150 students in homeopathy course, in management quota. The subject-matter of controversy is restricted to admissions in medical and dental colleges i.e 240 seats (150 in medical colleges and 90 in dental colleges) in the management quota that have been filled. The applications filed by the State Government seeking cancellation of examination were disposed of in terms of the order of this Court dated 16-8-2004. According to the applicants, the examination was held in fair and proper manner and the charts have been filed showing that 48 students had secured more than 80% marks, another 48 students secured between 70% and 80% marks, 39 students had secured marks between 60% and 70%, 14 students secured 50% to 60% marks and only one student belonging to reserved category had secured between 40% and 50% marks in HSC examination. Likewise, similar details in respect of admissions in dental colleges have been given by the petitioner. The admission of State quota seats were given on the basis of marks obtained by students in HSC examination.
4. Opposing the prayers made in the applications, it has been strenuously contended that the examination conducted on 28-7-2004 was farce and tainted. In support, the two main points put forth are: (1) large number of students having left the examination hall within 45 minutes; and (2) large number of questions having correct answer as ‘C’.
5. We have heard learned counsel and perused the record. A question has also been raised as to whether the power to oversee the examination as stipulated in the order dated 23-7-2004 and the decision in the case of Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697 would also include the power to cancel the said examination. The main matters have been referred for consideration to a larger Bench.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the distant point of time at which we are, and also having regard to the time stipulation given in Madhu Singh case (2002) 7 SCC 258 for the admission even in respect of stray seats by 30-9-2004, we are of the view that the petitioners are entitled to grant of interim stay of the decision dated 16-8-2004. As some of the questions may arise at the final hearing before a larger Bench, we would keep open the questions raised in the application and at present only stay the decision dated 16-8-2004. Accordingly, we stay the said decision till further orders.
IA No. 19
7. At this stage, it is not possible to permit the applicant to admit any candidate under NRI quota. IA is disposed of accordingly.
IA No. 20
8. Taken on board.
9. In view of the orders passed on IAs Nos. 11 and 12, no separate orders are necessary to be passed. The IA is disposed of.
Court Masters