Supreme Court of India
DR. AJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
- Citation
- 1990 INSC 359
- Decided
- 16 November 1990
Holding
The Court held that the State’s conduct was contrary to the Indian Medical Council Act and Supreme Court directions, imposed exemplary costs, and ordered compliance with the prescribed admission schedule while allowing admission of candidates who complete internship by 31 December 1990 under a two‑category system.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the Uttar Pradesh Government’s decision to fix the internship cut‑off date as 31 December 1990 and to allow candidates who had not completed their house‑manship to sit for the post‑graduate medical selection exam and be admitted, contrary to earlier Supreme Court directions and the Indian Medical Council Act. The Court examined whether the State’s deviation from the prescribed schedule (examination on 27 May 1990 instead of the mandated 2 May 1990) amounted to contempt and whether exemplary costs were appropriate. It held that the State’s actions violated the scheme of the Act and the Court’s orders, but it also provided a two‑category admission scheme to regularise the pending admissions. The Court imposed exemplary costs on the State and the principals of the seven medical colleges, directed the conduct of the examination by Lucknow University, set strict timelines for results, admissions and commencement of classes, and warned of severe consequences for any future non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- The Uttar Pradesh Government’s fixation of a December 1990 internship cut‑off and admission of candidates without completing house‑manship violated Supreme Court directions and the Indian Medical Council Act.
- Whether the State’s failure to hold the selection examination on the date prescribed by the Court constitutes contempt and warrants exemplary costs.
- Whether candidates who have not completed their internship may be admitted to post‑graduate courses.
- Validity of the 50 % qualifying base for post‑graduate admission.
Legislation cited
- Indian Medical Council Acts. 25, s. 33
- U.P. Universities Acts. 28(5)
Subjects
Post‑graduate medical admissionIndian Medical Council ActSupreme Court directionsExemplary costsComplianceCut‑off dateSelection examinationContemptMedical education
Judgment
DR. AJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL AND ORS. ETC.
A v.
. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
NOVEMBER 16, 1990
B [RANGANATH MISRA CJ. AND R.M. SAHAI, J.]
Professional Colleges-Admission to--U.P. State Medical Colleges
-Fixing of cut off date as end of December 1990-Contrary to Statute
and Rules-Medical post graduate course-Specialised study only most
eligible and qualified students to have access.
c This group of writ petitions is an off-shoot of the directions given
by this Court on 31.8.1990. These petitions relate to admission in the
Post Graduate Medical Courses in the seven Medical Colleges of Uttar
Pradesh. State. This Court by its judgment in 1987 (4) SCC p 459 has
directed that selection examination as already decided in Dr. Dinesh
D Kumar's case (1984) 3 SCC 654 shall be conducted by the All India
Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, to provide an integrated base
for medical education for post graduate studies & M.B.B.S. stage on
nat.ional basis. Reservation of quota on all India basis was considered
necessary. In case of Post Graduate Studies 25% was left to be done by
A.I.I.M.S. vide selection, and 75% was left to the States to make their
E selections but the consideration which should weigh for the purpose of
selection were also detailed in some of the judgments. The details of the
directions given for post graduate studies selection examination are: (i)
the announcement is to be made on October 1 of every year, (ii) the
applications could be made within full four weeks, (iii) after scrutiniz-
ing applications admit cards would be announced, (iv) on 2nd Sunday of
F January of every year, examination shall be held and the results be
announced within four weeks from holding of the examination, (v)
admission shall commence two weeks after the declaration of results.
The last date for taking admission shall be six weeks from the date of
the announcement of the results. The courses of study shall be common
in every such institutions and such study shall be provided from 2nd
G May of every year throughout the country. Notification regarding
examination, publication of results, allotment of place of admission,
keeping preferences in view, shall be published into successive issues of
one national paper in English and at least two local papers in the
language of the States as quickly as possible.
ff In 1989 the State of Bihar came up in appeal before this court
184
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 185
challenging the directions of Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court
A
taking· exception to steps taken by the Bihar Gi>vernment contrary to
the aforesaid directions. So in State of Bihar v. Dr. San jay Kumar
Sinha, [1989] 4 J.T. 360 in para 6 it was stated by this Court. That time
schedule had not been strictly followed and all institutions running post
graduate studies are bound by this court's order and shall comply with
the time frame strictly. There would be no lapse in this regard in future". B
Soon after an application from the State of Uttar Pradesh came for
disposal for not complying with the directions made by this Court. Both
the State of Uttar Pradesh and the seven Medical Colleges run by it are
bound to implement the scheme given in the main judgment as modified
from time to time. In 1987 and 1989, directions were given in relation to C
two things (1) Uniform pattern of the Courses and the time schedule for
selection examination and admission of students in the Post Graduate
Studies and Commencement of sessional teaching. In 1987, in this
Court's Order a clear five-year period was allowed to evolve the system
of uniformity, time-frame for every purpose like admission, teaching
etc. from the year 1988. Two distinct directions were made, the require- D
ment of change of regulations, and rules and the procedural aspects in
operating the -scheme-(2) for regulating admlSSions, commencement of
teoohing. Thus there is no scope for confusion.
Uttar Pradesb_ State case is a cJear case of either wilM defanlt and
total callous indifference to binding and lawful orders made by this E
court; i.e. to initiate action at appropriate time for admission and com-
mencement of examination for the year 1990 with effect from 2nd May
1990 for 75% seats entrance examination which was to be conducted by
Lucknow University. So from every possible angle the Uttar Pradesh
Government and Principles of each of the seven Medical Colleges have
done nothing short of contumacy. It is therefore necessary that exemp- F
lary costs against the Uttar Pradesh State and the public authorities has
been imposed instead of initiating contempt. These payment are to be
made to the Registry by 30th September 1990 as per compliance of the
orders of this Court.
The Uttar Pradesh Gi>vermnent" and six Medical Colleges except G
that of Meerut were totally indifferent to the directions of this court in
the matter of selecting candidates for 75% Post Graduate seats within
the state fixed the cut-off date for completion of internship as
31.12.1990. It notified the examination for 27.5.1990 inStead of
2.5.1990. By this Court Order on 31.8.1990 it was not open to the Uttar
Pradesh Government to hold the examination on 27.5.1990 when the H
186 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R.
session for the year was to start on 2.5.1990. No reference was made to
A the fixation of 31.12.1990 as the cut-off date for the completion of
housemanship. The State of Uttar Pradesh was directed to hold the
examination as contemplated to be held on 27.5.1990 through Lucknow
University by a particular date and called upon the Medical Colleges to
complete admissions for the year 1990-91 session by the date indicated
B in the order and to deem the commencement of session to have been
from 2.5.90 by providing additional teaching facilities to cover up the
courses.
In holding the examination the State Government lost sight of
directions given in Bihar matter as to the cut-off date not to beyond the
commencement of the session. Thus admitted candidates out of which
C some were fully qualified, whUe others had yet to complete their
internship.
While delivering the Order, the Court,
D HELD: This being specialised study in the Medical Faculty the
most eligible qualified students should '1ave access to the courses for the
ultimate soclal good. [193A)
It is in general interest that the Sil"!o cut-off base as has been
adopted should be sustained. [193EJ
E
The action of the State of Uttar Pradesh in fixing the cut-off date
as the end of December 1990 anU allowing the candidates undergoing.
internship to take the selection examination as also get admitted to the
Post Graduate courses i!>oontrary to the scheme of the Indian Medical
Council Act and the regulations made there under. [193G I
F
The prevalent arrangement in the State of Uttar Pradesh can only
be classified as another indisciplined action. [19311]
Specialisation is the main basis of Post Graduate study. Hereafter
no•one shall be admitted without complying with the requirements of
G the Act, the Rules and the Regulations, and no State Government or
authority running a Medical College would be permitted to avoid comp-
liance of the Law ..[1948; F-GJ
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: I.A. NOS. 2-4, 5-6.
IN
H
Writ Petition (C} No. 1114 of 1990.
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 187
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
A
Satish Chandra, Gopal Subramanium, Rakesh, R.P. Singh, Ms.
Abha R. Sharma, Murlidhar, K.D. Nag, R.K. Gupta, T.C. Sharma,
P.C. Kapur, Ms. Indra Sawhney, S.A. Syed, M.T. George, E.C.
Agarwal, Ms. S. Dikshit and H.N. Salve for the appearing parties.
B
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
ORDER
This is a group of cases under Article 32 of the Constitution with
several applications for interventions and the dispute relates to admis-
sion in the Post Graduate Medical Courses in the seven Medical Col- c
leges located within the State of Uttar Pradesh. This Court in Dr.
Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v. Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad &
Ors., [1984] 3 SCC 654 for the reasons indicated therein, disapproved
the idea of wholesale reservation made in some of the States on the
basis of domicil or residential requirement and so far as medical educa- D
tion was concerned, with a view to providing an integrated base of such
education on national basis provided reservation of quota at the
MBBS stage as also at the Post Graduate stage to be filled up on all
India basis. Such reservation so far as the Post Graduate Study is
concerned was to be 25% and the selection examination in terms of the
Court's decision was left to be done by the All India Institute of Medi- E
cal Sciences at New Delhi. In respect of the remaining 75% of the seats
in Post Graduate Courses it was left to the States to make their selec-
tion but the considerations which should weigh for the purpose of
selection were appropriately indicated in some of the judgments of this
Court.
F
We are concerned in this group of cases with the selection of
candidates for the several sepcialities in the Post Graduate Courses in
the seven Medical Colleges as referred to above. This Court in its
order reported in (1987) 4 sec 459 had directed:
"What remains now to be dealt with is the finalisation G
of the programme relating to the selection examination. As
already decided the selection examination shall be con-
ducted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New
Delhi. The announcement for holding of the selection
examination shall be made on October I of every year and
a full four weeks' time would be made available to candi- H
188 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R.
dates for making their applications. After the applications
A are received not later than six weeks from October, the
same would be scrutinised and duly processed and admit
cards would be issued. Examination shall be held on the
2nd Sunday of January. The result of examination shall be
announced within four weeks from holding of the examina-
B tion. Admission shall commence two weeks after the decla-
ration of resulis. The last date for taking admission shall be
six weeks from the date of the announcement of results but
the Head of every Institution shall be entitled to condone
delay upto seven days for reasons shown and grounds
recorded in special cases. The courses of study shall com-
mence in every institution providing such study throughout
c the country from May 2. Notification announcing examina-
tion, publication of result and allotment of place of admis-
sion (keeping preference in view and our direction regard-
ing preference of lady candidates in place of proximity to
residence) shall be published into successive issues of one
D national paper in English having large circulation in every
State and at least in two local papers in the language of the
State as quickly as possible."
A little later the State Bihar and others came up in appeal before
this Court challenging a direction of the Ranchi Bench of the Patna
E High Court where the High Court had taken execution to steps taken
by the Bihar Government in a manner contrary to the aforesaid direc-
tion. While disposing of the appeal we indicated in our judgment
reported in (1989 4 J. T. 320) thus:
"Obviously the relevant directions have not been fol-
F lowed by the examining body for the current year. Simi-
larly the State of Bihar did not follow the directions of this
Court while drawing up its prospectus. If ihe courses of
study are to commence from May 2, the last qualifying date
could not have been fixed as May 31, 1989. It has been
reiterated before us that several States have not been fol-
G lowing the directions. Instead of issuing notice to the States
and Union Territories for examining the correctness of the
allegations of delay and non-compliance of the directions,
we have thought it appropriate to indicate that everyone
including the States, the Union territories. and other
authorities running Medical College with Post Graduate
H Courses are bound by our order and must strictly follow the
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 189
time schedule indicated in paragraph 6 of the order. We A
have not proceeded against the defaulting authorities for
violation of this Court's order, hoping that there would be
no recurrence of it but we would like to administer a warn-
ing to every orie that if it Is brought to our notice at any
time in future that there has been violation, a serious view
of such default shall be taken. We hope and trust that every B
one concerned shall comply with the time-frame strictly
and there would be no lapse in this regard in future."
Some time thereafter an application for the State of Uttar
Pradesh came for disposal before this Court when not having complied
with the directions made by this Court in the manner noticed in the
Bihar case, the State wanted extension of time. This Court on that c
occasion observed as under:
"This application is grounded upon the default which
this Court has been anxious to eliminate and apprehensive
of non-compliance of directions wherein a serious threat of D
punishment have been held out. Roth the State of Uttar
Pradesh and the seven medical colleges run by it are bound
to implement the scheme in the main judgment as modified
from time to time and were covered by the orders of 1987
and 1989. We have read our order of 1987 again and find no
scqpe for the stand of the respondents in the present peti- E.
tion for the position that there was .scope for confusion
relating to the directions in regard to uniform pattern of the
courses and the time schedule for the various aspects con-
cerned with the selection examination, . admission of
students into the Post Graduate Courses and commence-
' ment of sessional teaching. These were two different mat- F
ters and while regard to items referred to in the order of
1987 a clear five-year period was allowed to evolve the
system of uniformity, time-frame for every purpose like
admission and teaching was intended to be brought into
force from the year 1988. Two. distinct sets of directions
were made-one in regard to the requirement of change of G
the regulations and rules and the procedural aspects in
operating the scheme, and the other for regulating admis-
sion and comniencement of teaching. We reject the plea of
the Uttar Pradesh Government and the other respondents
that there was scope for conflision and non-compliance
with_ the direciions was relatable to a bona fide mistake. H
190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R.
This is a clear instance of either wilful default and total
A
callous indifference to binding and lawful orders made by
this Court. Where the direction is clear and arising out of
default of compliance, a further direction is made clarifying
the position and warning defaulting parties of serious con-
sequences we find no scope for any justification for con-
B tinued default. More so, when the State Government and
its officers obliged to give effect to our directions fail to
take notice of the same and exhibit a conduct of non-
cooperation and callousness.
It was the obligation of the State of Uttar Pradesh in
terms of the two orders referred to above to initiate action
c for admission in appropriate time so as to allow the com-
mencement of the course for the year 1990 with effect from
May 2, 1990. It is the respondents' stand that for the year
1990 the Entrance Examination for the remaining seats
(besides 25% controlled by the AIIMS) was to be con-
D ducted by the University of Lucknow on 27th May, 1990.
This itself was contrary to the scheme and exhibited the
same pattern of conduct as appeared in the Bihar case
referred to above. In fact on looking at the matter from
every possible angle we have not been able to appreciate
the submissions of Mrs. Dixit and are of the view that the
E performance of the State of U .P. and its public authorities
is anything short of contumacy. At one stage we were
thinking of initiating contempt action against the State and
the Principals of the seven Medical Colleges. Such steps for •
disciplining the State and the public authorities concerned
would result in multiplicity of proceedings; therefore,
F instead of undertaking such an excise we have thought it
appropriate to impose exemplary costs against the State of
Uttar Pradesh as also the Principal of each of the seven
Medical Colleges. We direct that the State of Uttar
Pradesh shall pay costs of Rs.20,000 (twenty thousand)
while each of the Principals shall pay Rs.500 (five hundred)
G by way of costs. So far as the State of Uttar Pradesh is
concerned, it has of course to come from the public fund of
the State. In regard to the Principals of each of seven Medi-
cal Colleges located at Lucknow, Agra, Kanpur, Jhansi
Meerut, Gorakhpur and Allahabad, the amount of costs
shall be recovered personally from their salary and they
H would not be entitled to reimbursement of the same from
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 191
the State exchequer. These payments be made with the
Registry of this Court by 30th of September, 1990. A copy A
of this order shall be made available to each of the Princi-
pals of th seven Medical Colleges for compliance.
The State of U.P. is directed to hold the Selection
Examination stipulated by it for May 27, 1990, by 30th of B
,September, 1990 and the University of Lucknow is autho-
rised to conduct it. The result of the examination should be
published within one week, that is, by 8th of October, 1990
and admissions should be completed on or before 26th of
October, 1990 and classes shall commence on 1st of
November, 1990. The classes shall be deemed to have
commenced from 2nd May, 1990, and each of the Medical C
Colleges shall undertake to provide additional teaching in
course of the session so as to compensate the students for
the days lost on the basis that the course begun on 2nd
May, 1990. Each of the Principals of the Medical Colleges
shall certify to the Registry of this Court by 15th D
November, 1990, that this part of order has been imple-
mented.
Before we part with the case we would like to again
administer a warning to everyone associated with the
scheme for implementing the directions contained in the E
main judgment and the subsequent orders that a future
default by anyone in any part of the country shall indeed be
seriously viewed and drastically dealt with. This Court has
stated in the past and we would like now to reiterate that
the directions of this Court are not intended to be brushed
aside and overlooked or ignored. Meticulous compliance is p
the only way to respond to directions of this Court."
(J.T. 1990 3 SC 707)
This group of writ petitions is an off-shoot of the directions refer-
red to above. --- G
There are seven Medical Colleges in the State which are located
at Agra, Allahabad, Gorakhpur, Jhansi, Kanpur, Lucknow and
Meerut. As the order of this Court dated 31.8.1990 would show the
Meerut College had held its own selection examination in time and the
direction, therefore, related to the remaining six colleges. H
....,,
•
192 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R.
The Uttar Pradesh Government totally indifferent to our pre-
A
vious directions and oblivious of the consequences that might flow out
of such indiscreet steps had in the matter of selecting the candidates
for the 75% Post Graduate Seats in the Medical Colleges within the
State fixed the cut-off date for completion of the internship as
31.12.1990, though it had notified the examination for 27.5.1990. By
B our previous order we had held that it was ·not open to the Uttar '
Pradesh Government to hold the examination on 27.5.1990 when the
session for the year was to start on 2.5.1990. 1n that order no reference
was made to the fixation of 31.12.1990 as the cut-off date for the
completion of housemanship as it was not necessary for making that
order and obviously because that had already been dealt with in the
Bihar matter. The order of 31.8.1990 directed the State of Uttar
c Pradesh to hold the examination contemplated to be held on 27.5.1990
through the Lucknow University by a particular date and called upon
the Medical Colleges to complete the admission for the 1990-9,1 session
by the date indicated in the order and to deem the commencement of
the course to have been from 2.5.1990 and provide additional teaching
D facilities to cover up the courses.
In holding the examination after this Court's direction, the State
Government lost sight of the fact that in the Bihar matter we had
indicated that the cut-off date beyond the commencement of the
session would not be tenable and thus admitted candidates who had
E not completed their housemanship to the selection examination and
many of them have now been found to have qualified for admission.
We have, therefore, before us a set of candidates who satisfy the
requisite conditions and are qualified for selection and a set of candi-
dates who have 'taken the selection examination and have qualified
though they have not finished their internship yet. There is challenge
F to the validity of the 50% qualifying base in the selection test.
Mr. Salish Chandra has contended before us that there was no
cut-off remark in the original brochure which required the examina-
tion to be held on 27 .5.1990 and, therefore, for the first time, it could
not have been introduced in the fresh notice in purported compliance
G of the Court's order of 31.8.1990.He has further contended that such a
provision could only be in a notification in terms of section 28(5) of the
U .P. Universities Act and in the absence of an appropriate notification
it is not a binding requirement. There may be some force in the sub-
mission of learned counsel but we do not think in the present facts and
setting of events and in particular for meeting the problem which has
H arisen we need approve a technical stand.
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 193
This is a specialised study and being Post Graduate Course in the A
Medical Faculty, the most eligible and qualified students should have
access to the courses for the ultimate social good. In the main case-
Pradeep Jain v. Union of India, [1984] 3 SCC 654 at page 673 of the
Reports this Court said:
B
"The philosophy and pragmatism of universal excellence
through equality of opportunity for education and advance-
ment across the nation is part of our founding faith and
constitutional creed. The effort must, therefore, always be
to select the best and most meritorious students for admis-
sion to technical institutions and medi.cal colleges by pro-
viding equal opportunity to all citizens in the country C
....... Moreover, it would be against national interest to
admit in medical colleges or other institutions giving
instruction in specialities, Jess meritorious students when
more meritorious students are available .... "
D
It is not disputed that in Uttar Pradesh the prevailing practice
was a 50% base for allowing Post Graduate Study to doctors with
MBBS qualifications but taking their University examination as the
base without any separate selection test, it is not the case of any of the
parties before us that the selection is bad for any other reason. We are
of the view that it is in general interest that the 50% cut-off base as has E
been adopted should be sustained.
Section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act contemplates of
regulations and sub-section thereof authorises regulations to be made
for the courses and the period of study and practical training to be
undertaken for grant of recognised medical qualifications. Section 25 F
of the Act provides that provisional registration and internship for a
r period of one year is a basic qualification necessary for acquiring the
full-fledged MBBS degree. We also find that a regular registration is
necessary for a candidate to get admitted into the Post Graduate
Course and regular registration would not be permitted until the
internship is completed. The action of the State of Uttar Pradesh in G
fixing the cut-off date as the end of December, 1990, and allowing the
candidates undergoing internship to take the selection examination as
also get admitted into the Post Graduate Courses is, therefore, con-
trary to the scheme of the Act and the regulations made thereunder.
The prevalent arrangement in the State of Uttar Pradesh can only be
classified as another indisciplined action. H
--;
'
194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R.
We cannot loss sight of the fact that on account of the irregular
A
steps taken by the State of Uttar Pradesh, a group of candidates have
been invited to sit at a selection examination before they have
acquired the requisite qualification and have been selected for admis-
sion. These candidates who are before us have been anxiously waiting
for their admission. Similarly there is a group of students who have
B had the full qualification and has been selected.
Specialisation is the main basis of Post Graduate Study. Every
candidate has indicated his or her preference in regard to specialisa-
tion. We are of the view that the admissions in respect of about 549
seats said to represent 75% of the State quota in the seven Medical
Colleges for the session 1990-91 should, therefore, be completed on
c the basis as indicated below:
(I) Those candidates who have had the requisite qualification
i.e. had become full-fledged degree-holders on or before
2.5.1990 and have been selected for admission should be put
D into Category-A. Admission to them shall be given first with
their preferred speciality; and
(2) Those candidates who had not completed their internship by
2.5.1990 and have, in the meantime, completed or are going
to complete the same by 31.12.1990 and have been found
E qualified for admission in the selection examination shall be
put into the second list and on the basis of availability of
seats as also the preference given by them for speciality on
comparative merit basis shall thereafter to admitted.
Keeping their respective merit in view, we have waived the
F requirement of completion of the internship as a condition precedent
to admission into the Post Graduate Degree. We would like to make it ·T
clear that hereafter no-one shall be admitted without complying with
the requirements of the Act, the Rules and the Regulations referred to
above and no State Government or authority running a Medical Col-
lege would be permitted to avoid compliance of the law.
G
The expectations of this Court when the order of 31.8.1990 had
been made have not worked out on account of the difficulties that have
been noticed now. We direct that on the basis of the present orders
admission should be completed within two weeks from now and at any
rate prior to 30.1l.1990, so that the teaching courses of this session
H must, therefore, be started from 1.12.1990 but subject to the deeming
A.K. AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. 195
provision that the same started from 2.5.1990. The actual teaching A
period would be hardly four to five months. We, therefore, direct that
the Principals of the respective Medical Colleges shall comply with the
directions indicated in the order of 3 l.8.1990 in the matter of provid-
ing additional teaching facilities and file the affidavit as indicated in
the order by 20.12. 1990 in the Registry of this Court.
B
Several writ petitions and intervention petitions have been filed
but we have not referred to them separately as we thought it appro-
priate to indicate the principles to regulate the admission for the
session and require compliance thereof so that the situation that has
arisen may be properly met. It would, therefore, follow that all the
writ petitions and the petitions for intervention and/or impleadment c
relating to admission into the Post Graduate Degrees for the 1990-91
session in the U.P. Medical Colleges are disposed of with these direc-
tions. There would be no order as to costs. But we would like to close
this matter with a warning to the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Princi-
pals of the Medical College located therein that any further infraction
of these directions shall be severely dealt with. D
S.B.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Post‑graduate medical admission"Sign in to search