NIROTI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction to the State of Rajasthan, the Director, Medical & Health Services (Family Welfare), Rajasthan, Jaipur and the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Bhilwara (hereinafter to be jointly referred as the respondents and severely as the respondents No. I to 3 respectively) to give admission to the petitioner in general nursing training course or to issue a writ, order or direction which may be deemed necessary and proper. The brief facts are as under :

(2.) An advertisement (Annx. 1) dated 16-81991 was published in the Rajasthan Patrika inviting applications from those who were desirous of getting admission in the general nursing training courses at various places in the Sate of Rajasthan. The minimum qualification prescribed for admission, as mentioned in the advertisement, was first year of Three Year Degree Course or 10 + 2 examination with Zoolozy, Chemistry and Physics as the subjects. The petitioner has passed his Senior Higher Secondary examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer in the year 1990. He obtained 286 marks out of the total marks of 500 and was placed in second division. However. in the paper of Physics and Chemistry he obtained 66% marks, in the paper of Zoology & Botany he obtained 61% marks and in the paper of General Agriculture he obtained 74% marks. In this way, the petitioner obtained 57.2% marks when calculated on the basis of all the subjects; 63.5% marks when calculated on the basis of Physics, Chemistry, Zoolozy & Botany papers aid 67% marks whe calculated on the basis of Physics, Chemistry, Zoolozy & Botany and Genera's Agriculture. The petitioner, who had applied for being admitted to the abovel said course, was not admitted although, according to the allegation of the petitioner persons, who had obtained less marks than him, had been given admission and when he contacted the office of the respondents. he was told that since he was having General Agriculture subject in 10 + 2 examina on he had not been admitted. He has alleged that one Ram Gopal Dubey having same subjects as that of the petitioner had been given admission at Bharatpur and it has been contended that the respondents had treated the petitioner with discrimination, in the matter of admission.

(3.) Notice of the writ petition was issued to the respondents on 18-12-1991 to show cause why this writ petition should not be admitted and disposed of and the rule was made returnable within two weeks. After service of the notice, the learned Government Advocate appeared on 31-1-1992 and sought time for filing the reply and the case was adjourned to 4-1-1992 on which date, at the request of the learned Government Advocate, two weeks further time was given to the respondents to file the reply with the understanding that if the reply was not filed within the above said period, the writ petition would be heard on merits. In spite of the fact that further time was granted firstly without costs and thereafter subject to payment of costs, to be recovered from the official who is at fault and is responsible for delaying the reply, neither the reply has been filed nor the costs has been paid and no reason was coming forward for non-compliance of the orders and, as such, request for further adjournment was declined vide separate detailed order passed today.