STATE OF BIHAR AND ORSversusDR. SANJAY KUMAR SINHA AND ORS.

                     STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS
A
                                v.
                DR. SANJAY KUMAR SINHA AND ORS.

                             NOVEMBER 15, 1989

B              [RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND
                      K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.]

         Professional Colleges-Admission to: Bihar Medical Cplleges~
    Admission to Post-graduate courses-Cut off date of eligibility-
    Compliance with orders of Supreme Court fixing time schedule-
    Necessity for.
c
           In a Writ Petition filed before the High Court, the respondents, a       '
    group of medical graduates, challenged the prospectus for admission to
    the post-graduate medicalcourses,for the year 1989, which prescribed
    3 lst May, 1989 as cut-off date of eligibility, as contrary to the directions
D   of this Court in Dr. Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v. Motilal Nehru Medical
    College, Allahabad & Ors., [1987] 4 SCC 459. Finding that the time-
    frame 'lei by this Court was not adhered to, the High Court quashed the
    prospectus to the extent that the cut-off date of eligibility was fixed as
    31.5.1989.

E         In the appeal before this Court, the appellants contended that as
    the All India Entrance Examination held by the All India Institute of
    Medical Sciences was not conducted in time, as fixed by this Court and·
    intimation of the results was sent late, the scheme formulated by the
    Court was not being implemented properly. The examining body, in its
    affidavit, expressed, regrets and assured that there would not be any
F   default in future.

          Disposing of the Writ Petition, thiS Court,

        HELD: The relevant directions of this Court have not been fol-
  lowed by the examining body for the current year. Similarly, !he State
G did not follow the directions while drawing up its prospectus. If the
  courses of study were to commence from May 2, the last qualifying date
  could not have been fixed as May 31, 1989. Everyone including the
  States, the Union Territories and other authorities running Medical
  Colleges with Post Graduate Courses are bound b.v this Court's order
  and must strictly follow the time schedule laid down therein in this
H regard. A serious view would be taken if any violation of this Court's
                                                                        I

                                        168
               STATE OF BIHAR v. S.K. SINHA ·!MISRA, J.)               169

order is brought to notice in future. Everyone concerned should comply
with the time-frame strictly and there should be no lapse in this regard      A
in future. [171C; E-FJ

       The mistake of the State in fixing a date beyond the cut-off date
fixed by this Court has misled a group of candidates. It is in the interest
of all that this mistake should be condoned and admissions for this year      B
should be permitted on the basis of the result of the selection examina-
tion with 31st of May, 1989, as cut-off date. This departure is confined
to the present year only. [172A-B]

     Dr. Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v. Motilal Nehru Medical College,
Allahabad & Ors., [1987] 4 SCC 459.
                                                                              c
      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3658
of 1989.

     From the Judgment and Order dated 30.3.1989 of the Patna High
Court in C.W.J. No. 34 of 1989.                                               D

      Pramod Swarup for the Appellants.

     M.C. Bhandare (NP), A.K. Goel and Ms. Gyan Sudha Misra for
the Respondents.
                                                                              E
    S.P. Kalra and Shailendra Bhardwaj for All India Institute of
Medical Sciences.

      G.L. Sanghi and A. Sharan for the Intervenor.

      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by                              F

      MISRA, J. Special leave granted.

      Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 30th of March, 1989
made by the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court in a Writ Petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court was moved by a          G
set of medical graduates who are respondents before us challenging
the prospectus for admission into the post-graduate medical admission
published by the Controller of Examination-cum-Additional Director,
Health· Services Department of Bihar for the year 1989 on the allega-
tion that the prescription that a candidate for the purpose of getting
admitted to the _Post Graduate Course must complete his or ber house-         H I
      170         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [ 1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R.

  job of 12 months on or before 31st May, 1989, was contrary to the
A directions of this Court i~ the case of Dr. Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v.
  Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad & Ors., [198714SCC459.
  The High Court found that the time-frame set by this Court in the
  reported order was not adhered to in the prospectus and, therefore,
  allowed the writ petition by mandamus directing the Stat~ arid its
B officers not to permit any candidate to take the Post Graduate Medical
  Test if he had not the requisite qualification of completing 12 months'
  house-job on 1st May, 1989. It further quashed the prospectus to the
  extent that the cut-off date of eligibility was fixed as 31.5.1989.

        The State of Bihar and its Officers who were respondents in the
  High Court are in appeal and their main contention is that the All
C India Entrance Examination for Post Graduate Medical Courses held
  by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences was not conducted in
  time as fixed by this Court and intimation of the results was ~ent late.
  It was further argued before us that several States have also not been
  complying with the time-frame indicated by this Court in the reported
D order and as such the scheme formulated by the Court is not being
  implemented properly. In view of such specific allegations, particu-
  larly against the examining body which has been entrusted with the
  work by this Court, notice was issued to the All India Institute of
  Medical Sciences and the Institute had entered appearance through
  counsel and has filed its affidavit.
E
            In the reported order it was stated by us:
                                                                     I
                  "What remains now to be dealt with is the finalisation of the
                  programme relating to the selection examination. As
                  already decided the selection examination shall be con-
F                 ducted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New
                  Delhi. The announcement for holding of the selection
                  examination shall be made on October 1 of every year and
                  a full four weeks' time would be made available to candi-
                  dates for making their applications. After the applications
                  are received not later than six weeks from October 1, the
                  same would be scrutinised and duly processed and admit
                  caros would be issued. Examination shall be h¢ld on the
                  second Sunday of January. The results of examination shall
                  be announced within four weeks from holding of the exami-
                  nation. Admission shall commence two weeks after the
                  declaration of results. The last date for taking admission
It!               shall be six wekks from the date of the announcement of
                STATE OF BIHAR v. S.K. SINHA [MISRA, J.]                 171

              results but the Head of every institution shall be entitled to
              condone delay upto seven days for reasons shown and               A
              grounds recorded in special cases'. The courses of study
              shall commence in every institution providing such study
              throughout the country .from May 2. Notification announc-
              ing examination, publication of result and allotment of
              place of admission (keeping preference in view and our            B
              directions regarding preference of lady candidates in places
              of proximity to residence) shall be published in two succes-
              sive issues of one 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."

         Obviously the relevant directions have not been followed by the        t
   examining body for the current year: Similarly the State of Bihar did
   not follow the directions of this Court while drawing up its prospectus.
  If the courses of study are to commence from May 2, the last gualifying
  date could not h.ave been fixed as May 31, 1989. It has been .reiterated
   before us that several States have not been following the directions.        D
  Instead of issuing notice to the States and Union Territories for
  examining the correciness of the allegations of delay and non-com-
  pliance of the directions, we have thought it appropriate to indicate
·that everyone including the States, the Union Territories and other
  authorities running Medical Colleges with Post Graduate Courses are
   bound by our order and must strictly follow the time schedule indi-          E
 . cated in paragraph 6 of the order. We 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
   warning to everyone 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 everyone concerned shall comply with the    F
   time-franfe strictly and there would be no lapse in this regard in future.

       Counsel for the All India Institute of Medical Sciences has expre-
 ssed regrets for what has happened and has assured us that there would
 be no default in future.                     ·
                                                                    -           G
       Counsel for the respondents has brought to our n<>Jice the posi-
 tion that in the previous year the State of Bihar had taken the stand
 that the extension was not possible in view of this Court's directions
 and the State's stand this year was to the contrary. Counsel for the
 State of Bihar has regreted this position. We find that·those who had
 qualified beyond the cut-off date in the previous year have taken              H
    172         SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R.

A examination in terms of the prospectus of this year along with the new
  group. The mistake of the State in fixing a date beyond the cut-off date
  fixed by this Court has obviously misled a group of candidates. In
  these circumstances, we are of the view that it is in the interest of all
  that the mistake committed by the State of Bihar should be condoned
B and on the basis of the result of the selection examination with 31st of
  May, 1989, as the cut-off date, admissions for this year should be
  permitted. We agree with the High Court that the view it has taken on
  the basis of this Court's directions was the most appropriate one but in
  the special circumstances referred to above we have made a departure
  confined to the present year only.                             ,

C         The appeal is disposed of with these directions.

    N.P.V.                                             Petition disposed of.