K.C. Bhargava, J. - (1.) All the three petitioners aggrieved by not giving them their choice of speciality have approached this Court for (Sic) directing the opposite parties to consider the petitioners for allotment of speciality at the time of re-counselling for filling the four seats which were earlier reserved for Scheduled caste candidates.
(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that the Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination (hereinafter called PGMEE) 1994 was held on 16-1-94, the result of which has been declared on 16-3-94. The petitioners, according to their merit, were placed at serial nos. 7, 9, and 12 respectively and have been allotted the specialities of Prosthodontics, Pedodontics and Periodontics respectively and were admitted to these course. There were 24 seats available in the K.G. Medical College, Lucknow for M.D.S. course, out of which 6 are for central pool and rest 18 are for the State pool Out of the seats for State pool, six are reserved for SC and ST candidates and the remaining 12 seats were open for general candidates. Only two Scheduled caste candidates are available for admission to M.D.S. course, who have been admitted in Orthodentics and Oral surgery speciality. The remaining 4 seats in specialities of Operative Dentistry, Prosthodontics, Pedodontics and Periodontics are lying vacant and the opposite parties want to fill up the seats from the students of waiting panel. This will adversely affect the petitioners as the persons in the waiting list, who are lower in merit, will get better speciality than the petitioners who are higher in merit. The representation to this effect was moved by 18 students including the two SC candidates, copy of which is Annexure-7. Three students of the waiting panel also made representation to the authority concerned to the effect that if they are allotted these four vacancies, they would surrender their seats in favour of the students higher in rank if any of them will opt for the same and will be content with any seat in any department in the MDS course, 1994. Copy of this representation is Annexure-8 to the writ petition. The petitioners also made representation indicating their choice of specialities against these four vacancies which could not be filled by the students of reserved class.
(3.) At the time of counselling the opposite party no. 2 did not disclose the four seats which should have fallen vacant in the event of candidates of reserved class opting for only two of the specialities. Therefore, the petitioners could not make their choice for better specialities on account of this fault of opp. party no. 2.;