U.C. Srivastava, S.C. Mathur, J. - (1.) Through the instant petition Doctor Vijai Kumar Shukla has sought admission in King George Medical College, Lucknow to the course prescribed for diploma i.e. Child Health for the Session 1985-86.
(2.) It appears that the petitioner as well as opposite party No. 4 Dr. Pancham Singh sought admission to the said course. According to the averments made in the writ petition the petitioner's first choice was in respect of Diploma in Child Health and his last choice was for M. D. (Pathology). Instead of the petitioner, Doctor Pancham Singh had been admitted to the diploma course. In paragraph I of petition the petitioner has mentioned that his merit index at M.B.B.S. examination was 58. 9% while that of Pancham Singh it was below 52%. The averment of percentage regarding Doctor Pancham Singh has been made in paragraph 7 of the Writ Petition. The petitioner's plea is that being higher in merit he was entitled to be admitted in preference to Doctor Pancham Singh. Further case of the petitioner is that under the relevant government Order dated 15-12-82, Annexure-I, Doctor Pancham Singh was not even eligible to be admitted as his merit index at M.B. B. S. examination was below 52% and candidates having merit index of below 52% were debarred from being admitted. Although copy of this petition was served upon learned counsel for the State as far back as on 3rd September, 1985 he has not filed any counter affidavit so far. The case was adjourned on several occasions. Today when the case was taken up, learned counsel for the State stated that a representative of the Department had come with the records and the records would be produced before the court. The hearing was deferred for 10 minutes and now more than 10 minutes have elapsed, but the representative of the government has not appeared. In the circumstances, petitioner's averment that his merit was higher than that of Doctor Pancham Singh stands unrebutted. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to show any valid reason for admitting Doctor Pancham Singh in preference to the petitioner. In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be admitted to the course in question.
(3.) Apart from claiming a writ of mandamus to command the Opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 to admit the petitioner to the course in question, the petitioner has also prayed for quashing the admission of Doctor Pancham Singh. The petitioner is primarily interested in his own admission. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to disturb the admission already granted to Doctor Pancham Singh.;