Admissions to 50% of State government quota seats in the postgraduate medical courses are likely to be delayed, as a Special Division Bench of the Madras High Court has pronounced a split verdict on the issue.
In view of the difference of opinion among the judges, they passed separate orders when the pleas came up for hearing on Wednesday.
The senior judge of the Bench, Justice K.K. Sasidharan, opined that the methodology adopted by the State for giving incentive marks for in-service candidates was not in conflict with the method evolved by Medical Council of India (MCI).
“In the absence of specific challenge, and May 7 being the cut-off date prescribed by the Supreme Court for counselling, the questions regarding reservation for in-service candidates and award of incentive marks for experience for both the service and non-service candidates are kept open to be decided in appropriate proceedings,” Justice Sasidharan said. He directed the authorities concerned to consider awarding incentive marks in accordance with the method indicated in the prospectus issued by the State for 2017-18 admission.
On the contrary, Justice Subramaniam, the other judge, held that certain clauses under Chapter VI merit list of the State prospectus were inconsistent with the PG Medical Regulation, 2000 issued by the MCI. Hence, he quashed the same. He then directed the State to formulate a procedure for admission in accordance with the MCI Regulations, and complete the admission process as per the time frame fixed by the apex court (May 7).
The issue pertains to a batch of appeals moved by in-service candidates of postgraduate medical courses assailing the order of a single judge dated April 17. The order mandated the State government follow the Medical Council of India’s (MCI) PG Medical Education Regulations, 2000, while making admissions such courses in the 50% quota available for the State.
Considering the urgency as the seats have to be filled before May 7, the Chief Justice Indira Banerjee constituted a Special Division Bench to adjudicate the issue by May 3 as the summer vacation for the court has already commenced.
Now, as the issue remains unsettled in view of the split verdict, the appeals have been referred to the third judge, M. Sathyanarayana, appointed by Chief Justice to deliver his verdict. The final judgment would depend on the view taken by the third judge.
