SADHNA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are medical graduates. THEy are desirous of getting admitted to Post Graduate Courses. Some of the petitioners took the test conducted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh in January, 1995 for admission to Post Graduate Courses in Medicine and Surgery. THE others wanted to take the examination to be held in January, 1996. THEy moved this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution to challenge a notification issued by the U. P. Government providing for reservation for SC/ST/OBC candidates in Post Graduate Speciality and Super-speciality Courses such as M. D. and M. S. THE main contention is that this notification violates the fundamental right of the petitioners under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution.

(2.) IT may be noted that a similar writ petition was earlier moved challenging the reservation of seats for SC/ST/OBC candidates for admission to Post Graduate Courses in Medicine by some other persons. That Writ Petition (W. P. No. 771 of 1994) was heard along with another writ petition (W. P. No. 631 of 1994- Ashok Kumar Thakur v. State of Bihar). There the challenge was to the criteria followed by the State of Bihar for determining the creamy layer among the backward classes. The criteria followed by the States of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh in determining the creamy layer was struck down by a judgment dated 4/09/1994. In the aforesaid two cases, however, this Court did not have to consider the question of reservation of Post Graduate Courses in Medicine. Liberty was given to raise the question in appropriate proceedings in the following manner:-

(3.) THIS practice has been in force for some time. What gives rise to the present dispute is a circular/letter dated 31-8-95 written by the Principal Secretary, U. P. Government. to the Director General Medical Education and Training. Uttar Pradesh. In that circular, requirement of minimum qualifying marks, which was 35 Per Cent for the written examination, has been cancelled for the reserved seats. The contention of the petitioners is that even if these special category candidates fail to score any mark in the test, they will be eligible for admission as long as there are vacancies in the special categories.