- (1.) This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer: (i) For quashing of the letter No. 226(7A) dated 10.6.2011 issued under the signature of the Respondent No. 2, whereby and where under, the said Respondent has without any jurisdiction and authority sought to alter the prevailing policy and resolution of the Government dated 17.02.2009 for admission in various subjects/faculty of Post Graduate Medical Education although the said resolution dated 17.02.2009 as issued by the Government has also been duly relied upon and stated to be in conformity to the norms of the reservation policy of the State of Jharkhand filed on 08.07.2009 in a related matter of W.P.(C) No. 1992 of 2009; (ii) For issuance of other suitable order/ directions commanding upon the Respondent No. 2 showing them cause as to how a deviation can be permitted in the matter of reservation of Post Graduate and specialized PG Diploma seats of the Medical Colleges situated in the State of Jharkhand without adhering to the policy of granting reservations seat-wise/subject-wise and institution-wise particularly when in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India as also been followed up till now in the State of Jharkhand, reservation cannot be applied through roster or otherwise in the single post cadre; and (iii) For issuance of appropriate and suitable orders and command upon the Respondents to device and strike a balance between the interest of General and reserved categories candidates while filling the seats for admission in various subjects/faculty of Post Graduate Medical Education so that the merit cum option available to the General Category candidates is not ignored and unreasonably encroached.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that initially the policy was floated by the Respondent-State for the year 2002, which is reflected at Annexure - 3 to the memo of the writ petition. Thereafter, the policy for reservation was floated on 17th February, 2009, which is at Annexure - 4 to memo of the writ petition, in which as per Schedule -1 and II, reservation, points have been given. It is further submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that thereafter the Respondent-State has made total deviation from the earlier policies and has now issued an executive instruction dated 10.6.2009, which is at Annexure - 11 to the memo of petition, whereby, in certain subjects in Post Graduate Medical seats, 100% reservation has been given, wherein, the vacancy is only for one post. For example, in Bio-chemistry, MD (FMT), MD (Dermatology), MS (ENT), MCH (Neurosurgery), there is only one seat and if the executive instruction, issued by the Respondent-State dated 10th June 2011 (Annexure 11), which speaks about a new reservation policy, is allowed to continue, then the aforesaid faculties may not be available to the candidates of general category. It is further submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that if the reservation is allowed in the aforesaid subjects, which is available in the Post Graduate Study in Medical Faculty, it will tantamount to 100% reservation, which is not permissible in the eyes of law and, hence, the executive instruction dated 10th June, 2011 (Annexure 11 to the memo of the petition), issued by the Respondent-State, deserves to be quashed and set-aside.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon several decisions, including Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research v. Faculty Association and Ors., 1998 4 SCC 1Rajneesh Mishra and Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors,2003 3 JCR 188 and Dr. Suresh Chandra Verma and Ors. v. The Chancellor, Nagpur University and Ors., 1990 AIR(SC) 2023, and has pointed out that it has been decided by a Special Bench of this Court that reservation policy in the appointment matter will also be made applicable to the admission matters in Post Graduate Study in the Medical Faculty and in view of the aforesaid decision, the reservation must have been made subject-wise, whereas looking to Annexure 11, it appears that the reservation has not been made by the State subject-wise and, therefore also, the order at Annexure -11 to the memo of petition, needs to be set-aside.;