Chattisgarh High Court
Chhadamilal Chouksay Memorial ... vs Union Of India 2 Wpc/465/2019 Shri Jug ... on 7 May, 2019
1
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 1020 of 2019
1. Shreya Choubey D/o Chandrajeet Choubey, Aged About 19 Years R/o Plot No.
262, Jawahar Nagar, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh
2. Amiyo Biswas S/o Sushant Kumar Biswas Aged About 19 Years R/o Fafadih,
Station Road, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
3. Vishaka Tiwari D/o Vijay Kumar Tiwari, Aged About 23 Years R/o Hudco, Bhilai
District Durg Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Ayurveda, Yoga And
Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy ( Ayush), Ayush Bhawan, B
Block, GPO Complex , INA, New Delhi - 110023
2. Central Council Of Indian Medicine, Through - The Secretary, 61 - 65
Institutional Area Opposite D Block, Janakpuri New Delhi - 110058
3. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, Health, Family Welfare And
Medical Education Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
4. Ayush And Health Science University, Through - The Registrar, G.E. Road,
Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
5. The Director, Ayurveda, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And
Homeopathy ( Ayush ) Chhattisgarh Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
WPC No. 112 of 2019
1. Chhadamilal Chouksay Memorial Homoeopathy Medical College Hospital And Research Centre Through The Principal, Chhadamilal Chouksay Memorial Homoeopathy Medical College, Hospital And Research, Lalkhadan, Masturi Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
2. Maharana Pratap Homoeopathy Medical College And Hospital Through The Director, Maharanapratap Homoeopathy Medical College And Hospital, Near Rishabh Enclave, Imlidih New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
3. Raipur Homoeopathy Medical College And Hospital, Ramkund, Choubey Colony, Raipur Through The Principal, Dr. Mukund Pimple S/o Shri M.V. Pimple, Aged 44 Yrs. R/o Raipur Homoeopathy Medical College And Hospital, Ramkund, Choubey Colony, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2
---- Petitioners Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Department Of Ayurveda, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani Siddha And Homoeopathy Ayush Vibhag, Ayush Bhavan B - Block, G.P.O. Complex, I.N.A. New Delhi, P.S. New Delhi - 110023.
2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, To The Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Health And Family Welfare Department Atal Nagar, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, Raipur Chhattisgarh
3. The Director Department Of Ayurveda, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani Siddha And Homoeopathy (Ayush) Old Mantralaya Campus, Dks Bhawan, Raipur, P.S. Moudahapara District Raipur Chhattisgarh
4. Central Council Of Homoeopathy Through The Secretary, Central Council Of Homoeopathy 61-65, Institutional Area Opp. D Block Janakpuri P.S. Janakpuri, New Delhi - 110058
---- Respondents WPC No. 465 of 2019 Shri Jug Mahadev Education Society (A Society Registered Under The Chhattisgarh Societies Registrakaran Adhiniyam 1973) Through Its Authorized Person Ghanshyam Sahu S/o Shri M.R.Sahu Aged About 39 Years Pulgaon Chowk ,police Station Pulgaon ,district Durg Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary Ministry Of Ayurved Yoga And Naturopathy Unani ,siddha ,and Homeopathy (Ayush), Ayush Bhawan ,b -Block GPO Compalex Ina New Delhi 110023
2. Central Council Of Indian Medicine Through The Secretary ,61-65 , Institutional Area ,opposite D ,block Janakpuri ,new Delhi 110058
3. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Health ,family Welfare And Medical Education Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Post And Police Station Mandir Hasaud Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattiisgarh
4. Ayush And Health Science University Through The Registrar Ge Road ,raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
5. Directorate Ayurveda Yoga And Naturopathy Uanani Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush ) Chhattisgarh Through The Director Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents 3 For respective Petitioners : Shri Prafull N. Bharat, Shri V.R. Tiwari and Shri Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Advocates For Respondent Union of India : Shri B. Gopa Kumar, ASG For Respondents/State : Shri Alok Bakshi, Addl. AG Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri CAV Order (Judgment Reserved on 26.04.2019) (Judgment Delivered on 07.05.2019)
1. All the cases are heard together as common question of law has been agitated and are under challenge.
2. Challenge in these writ petitions are to the notification dated 11.06.2018 issued by the Government of India, wherein the qualification percentile marks have been prescribed to get admission in the Ayurvedic, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH) under Graduate Courses. Whereas the Rules framed under the relevant Acts for admission to Ayurvedic and Homeopathic course prescribe different qualifications.
3. The present petitions are concerned with the admission in the Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) and Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the qualification to get admission in Ayurvedic course earlier to the holding of the NEET was governed by the Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum Standards of Education in Indian Medicine) Regulations, 1986. It is stated that in such notification qualifying marks to get admission in AYUSH, which includes the admission in 4 BHMS courses was prescribed as 50% aggregate marks in the subjects of physics, Chemistry and Biology and for reserved category of physically handicapped students in 10+2 the relaxation was allowed. It is stated that in the year 2018 a communication dated 23.01.2017 was made, wherein the Central Government directed that the admission in the AYUSH/Ayurvedic degree to be carried out on the basis of merit list of National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). It is stated that further the correction was made to the date of application and it was corrected to be 23.01.2018. They would further submit that pursuant to such direction, the State Government has issued a notification in the paper on 21.02.2018 and in all such advertisements and notifications no cut off percentile marks was prescribed as a qualifying marks to be admitted in all AYUSH Courses. Learned counsel further submit that according to the chronological events it would show that on 23.01.2018 the Central Government issued the direction to select the AYUSH students on the basis of NEET result, it was further followed by the State Government by advertisement on 21.02.2018 and the NEET was conducted on 6.05.2018.
5. It is contended that the Union of India on 11.06.2018 issued a notification, therefore the rule of game was changed after the game was over i.e. the Exam. It is further stated that in view of such circumstances clarification was also sought from CBSE asking as to whether the NEET undergraduate course for the 2018 was also held for BAMS/BHMS. In reply to such query the CBSE, who conducted the examination replied that the NEET examination was for the admission only in MBBS/BDS courses alone. They would further submit that therefore, the qualification which was subsequently introduced of 50 percentile marks to be obtained in NEET on 11.06.2008 cannot be made applicable to the student seeking admission to the course of BAMS/BHMS. The reference was 5 made to the two orders one is passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1393 of 2019 {Association of Managements of Homeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharasthra Versus Union of India & ors.} on 1st of February, 2019. Further reference was made by this Court in WPC No.914/2018 between Dr. Ravikant Singh Rathore & anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & ors. and contended that in the likewise situation the Division Bench of this Court has held that if the criteria of the eligibility was changed subsequent to the examination, it cannot be made applicable to the students, who already appeared in examination.
6. Shri Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner in WPC No.112 of 2019 would submit that the petitioner do not want to press into motion the relief claimed in respect of letter dated 12 th of February, 2018 as made in prayer 10.1. It is contended that since the Supreme Court has nullified the effect of direction dated 11.06.2018, therefore, fresh counseling may be ordered for for admission of the students according to the existing qualification Rules under the Act. It is further contended that for homeopathy course regulations are made under the Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973, the regulations are called Homeopathy (Graded Degree Course) Regulations, 1983. Under those regulations the qualifications to the admission to the Course and the eligibility criteria is prescribed that student should have passed the Indian School Certificate Examination which is equivalent to 10 + 2 Higher Secondary Examination with Physics, Chemistry, Biology with Mathematics or any other elective subjects with English at a level not less than core course of English as prescribed by the National Council of Educational Research and Training after the introduction of the 10 + 2 + 3 years educational structure as recommended by the National Committee on Education. He would further submit that mode of 6 examination is also been prescribed in the regulation and the college of the petitioner would come under Rule 4A sub-clause (c), which do not prescribe any minimum qualification mark to be obtained in the NEET examination. He referred to the judgment passed by the Patna High Court in the case of Vihar Private Unani Medical Colleges Versus The Union of India & ors. {Civil Wrti Jurisdiction Case No.16541 of 2018} and would submit that the ratio decided by the Court would demonstrate that the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and the Dentists Act, 1948, the acts itself have been amended, whereas Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 do not find such amendment including the Homeopathy (Graded Degree Course) Regulations, 1983. Consequently, the direction dated 11.06.2018 passed by the Central Government cannot be applied as it would be ultra vires to the Act. He would further submit that the Rules framed by the Chhattisgarh government if are analyzed, it would show that the definition 2 (³½ do not specifically point about the mode of examination referring to NEET. As such the direction which has been given by the Central Government dated 11.06.2018 which has already been quashed by the another High Court cannot be set into motion.
7. Shri V.R. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner in WPC No.465/2019 would submit that this petition was filed in the month of February, 2019 and before the petition, this Court in earlier filed writ petition has directed to conduct the counselling on 14.11.2018 which would be evident from the Annexure P-6. In such order the date of counselling was extended with intake capacity of 100 students, however, the same was not followed in its true spirit which led to filing of another writ petition bearing WPC No.133 of 2019, wherein on 21.01.2019 this Court again directed for counseling for admitting 40 more students taking into the fact that only one date was available after the initial order of 4.11.2018. 7 It is further submitted that the order of counseling further be extended and the Universities are ready and willing to take up the extra classes and on the seat remained vacant for period of 4.5 years, therefore, the date may be extended.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Union of India opposes the arguments and submit that the observation made by the Supreme Court would not be applicable to the present petitioners and he submits that the notification dated 11.06.2018 has been issued so as to keep the quality of the education and admission of the student at the higher pedestal. He would further submit that by reading the submission of counsel before the Supreme Court he submits that those submissions have not been nullified by the Supreme Court on behalf of Union of India, therefore, that will govern the issue.
9. Learned State counsel would submit that initially the last date of counselling was on 15.11.2018 and because of the earlier litigation one petition was allowed on 21.01.2019 bearing WPC No.133 of 2019 (Shri Jug Mahadev Education Society Versus Union of India & ors.) the date of counselling was extended under the orders of the Court. It is stated that the conjoint reading of the prayer would show that in one petition bearing WPC No.112/2019 the prayer has been made that the State Government be directed to proceed for admission for the BHMS Course according to the Rules framed by the State Government in 2018 whereas in other petition WPC No.1020/2019 the prayer has been made that the sub rule (5) of Rule 3 of the Admission Rules of 2018 has been sought to be quashed which therefore, the prayer contradict each other. Referring the order of the Supreme Court it is further contended that the Supreme Court categorically stated that this order will not be treated as a precedent and consequently no benefit can be drawn and the facts has to be decided 8 individually in this case.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the records.
11. With respect to the admission to the Ayurvedic stream, the regulations have been framed under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. The notification was issued on 7th November, 2016 which reads as under :-
NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 7 November, 2016.
th No. 24-14/2016 (U.G. Regulation).-- In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (i), (j) and (k) of sub- section (1) of section 36 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (48 of 1970), the Central Council of Indian Medicine, with the previous sanction of the Central Government hereby makes the following regulations to amend the Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum Standards of Education in Indian Medicine) Regulations, 1986, namely:-
1. Short title and commencement.- (1) These regulations may be called the Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum Standards of Education in Indian Medicine) Amendment Regulations, 2016.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette
2. In the Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum Standards of Education in Indian Medicine) Regulations, 1986, for the Schedule I, the following Schedule shall be substituted, namely:-
"SCHEDULE - I (See regulation 5)
1. Aims and Objects.- The Bachelor of Ayurveda education shall aim at producing graduates, having profound knowledge of Ashtanga Ayurveda supplemented with knowledge of scientific advances in modern medicine along with extensive practical training so as to become efficient physicians and surgeons fully competent to serve the health care services.
2. Admission qualification.- The eligibility to seek admission in Bachelor of Ayurveda education are as under-
(a) 12 standard with science or any other equivalent examination th recognised by concerned State Governments and Education Boards with at least fifty per cent. aggregate marks in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
(b) For reserved category or special category like physically handicapped students in 10+2, they shall be given relaxation in marks for admission in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery as per rules for time being in force.
(c) For foreign students any other equivalent qualification to be approved by the concerned authority may be allowed.
3. Duration of course.- The duration of the course shall be five years and six months comprising-
(a) First Professional - Twelve months
(b) Second Professional - Twelve months
(c) Third Professional - Twelve months
(d) Final Professional - Eighteen months.
(e) Compulsory Rotatory Internship - Twelve months
4. XXX xxx xxx 9
12. Likewise for admission to the Homeopathy stream, the regulations were framed under the Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 and the rules were framed under Homeopathy (Degree Course) Regulations, 1983. The relevant part of the part- III of the Regulations, 1983 is reproduced hereunder:-
Part -III ADMISSION TO COURSE
4. Eligibility Criteria. - (i) No candidate shall be admitted to B.H.M.S. Degree Course unless he has passed -
(a) the higher secondary examination or the Indian School Certificate Examination which is equivalent to 10 +2 Higher Secondary Examination after a period of twelve years' study, the last two years of study comprising of Physics, Chemistry, Biology with Mathematics or any other elective subjects with English at a level not less than core course of English as prescribed by the National Council of Educational Research and Training after the introduction of the 10+2+3 years educational structure as recommended by the National Committee on Education;
Or
(b) the intermediate examination in science of an Indian University or Board or other recognised examining body with Physics, Chemistry and Biology which shall include a practical test in these subjects and also English as a compulsory subject;
or
(c) the pre-professional or pre-medical examination with Physics, Chemistry and Biology, after passing either the higher secondary school examination, or the pre-university or an equivalent Examination, which shall include a practical test in Physics, Chemistry and Biology and also English as a compulsory subject;
or
(d) the first year of the three years' degree course of a recognised University, with Physics, Chemistry and Biology including a practical test in these subjects provided the examination is a University Examination and candidate has passed 10 +2 with English at a level not less than a core course;
or 10
(e) any other examination which, in scope and standard is found to be equivalent to the intermediate science examination of an Indian University or Board, taking Physics, Chemistry and Biology including practical test in each of these subjects and English as a compulsory subject;
(ii) No candidate shall be admitted to B.H.M.S. Degree Course unless he has attained the age of 17 years' on or before 31 st December of the year of his admission to the first year of the course.
(iii) No candidate shall be admitted to B.H.M.S. Degree Course if he is blind (including colour blindness), deaf, dumb, deaf and dumb.
"4A. Criteria for selection of students. - (i) The selection of students to the college shall be based solely on merit of the candidate and for determination of merit, the following criteria be adopted uniformly throughout the country, namely :-
(a) In States, having only one Medical College and one University or examining body conducting the competitive examination, marks obtained at such qualifying examination shall be taken into consideration.
(b) In States, having more than one University or examining body conducting the competitive examination or where there is more than one medical college under the administrative control of one authority, a competitive examination shall be held so as to achieve a uniform evaluation.
(c) Where there are more than one college in a State and only one University or examining Board conducting the competitive examination, then a joint selection board consisting of the Principals of all the colleges and a representative from the faculty of University or examining Body, as the case may be, shall be constituted by the State Government for all colleges to achieve a uniform method of competitive examination.
(d) The Central Government itself or any other agency notified by it shall conduct a competitive examination in the case of institutions of an all india character.
(ii) A candidate shall be eligible for the competitive examination if he has passed any of the qualifying examinations specified under regulation 4:
Provided that a candidate who has appeared in the qualifying examination the result of which has not been declared, he may be provisionally permitted to take up the competitive examination and in case of selection for admission to the B.H.M.S. Degree Course, he shall not be admitted to that course until he fulfills the edibility criteria under regulation 4."
13. The reading of the criteria would show that to get admission in the Ayurvedic 11 Stream, the primary emphasis was on the examination of class XIIth standard or higher secondary examination which is 10 +2. In respect of Ayurved 50% aggregate marks were prescribed in subject of Physics, Chemistry and Biology and for reserved category the relaxation was given. For admission to the course of Homeopathy likewise the importance was given to the secondary examination or 10 + 2 higher secondary examination upto XIIth class and in last two years the subjects were prescribed as Physics, Chemistry and Biology with mathematics or any elective subject with English etc. In the Regulations for admission of both Ayurvedic and Homeopathy courses no cut off percentile was given as qualifying marks.
14. The communication dated 23.01.2017 which was subsequently corrected as 23.01.2018 the Union jointly with the purpose of getting admission into the B.A.M.S. i.e. Ayurvedic and B.H.M.S. i.e. Homeopathy directed that the seats shall be filled up by considering the merit list of National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). In this letter no percentile cut off marks was fixed. The State Government by advertisement dated 21.02.2018 made a publication in the paper that to get admission in the Homeopathy & Ayurvedic courses the candidate should pass the national eligibility test conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education, however, no qualifying percentile was given. The subsequent communication which was received under the Right to Information on 17.08.2018 the CBSE clarified that the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (UG) level was only for the purpose of taking admission in M.B.B.S. and B.D.S. courses.
15. Rule 4 & 4A of the Homeopathy (Degree Course) Regulations, 1983 prescribed the criteria for selection of students and provides that the selection of students 12 to the college shall be based solely on the merit of the candidate as prescribed under the Rules. Here for admission to Homeopathy college the admission would be governed by the Rule 4A (c) since one AYUSH University has been established by the State though the other colleges exist. Rule 4A (c) prescribed that where there are more than one college in a State and only one University then a joint selection board would be constituted.
16. Therefore, the regulation which was governing the admission to the course of Ayurvedic and Homeopathy did not prescribe the eligibility criteria of percentile through NEET. It was only under the instructions of Government of India as a direction was given by 12.02.2018 that in AYUSH undergraduate course from the Academic Year 2018-19 to be on the basis of the merit list of National Eligibility cum Entrance Test only. The said letter dated 12.02.2018 was subject of adjudication in a writ petition of Vihar Private Unani Medical Colleges Versus The Union of India through the Secretary & ors {2018 SCC OnLine Pat 1857} which has set aside such direction the relevant part of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:-
"In view of the discussions, as above, I am of the considered view that NEET could not be said to be compulsory for AYUSH (UG) Courses till necessary amendments are introduced in the Act and Regulations governing admission. The decision of the Union Government to provide NEET as compulsory for admission to AYUSH (UG) Courses, in my view, is unauthorized and contrary to the Regulations framed under Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. Letter dated 12.02.2018 of the Central Government is accordingly set aside."
So in view of the aforesaid discussion the direction for admission to both the streams of Ayurved & Homeopathic is not sustainable inclusive of both letter dated 11.06.2018 & 12.02.2018.
17. Apart from the aforesaid fact when the direction of 11.06.2018 issued by the 13 Government of India is considered in chronological date & event, it would show that the first communication by the Union was on 23.01.2017 wherein a direction was issued for BHMS and BAMS along with that they would be filled up by considering the merit list of NEET. The subsequent similar direction was issued on 12.02.2018. The State Government made a publication for examination of Ayush on 21.02.2018 filed as Annexure P-7 in WPC No.1020 of 2019. In such advertisement, it was notified that in order to get admission into the BHMS/BAMS courses along with the others, the students have to appear through NEET, no minimum percentile was notified. The NEET exam was held on 06.05.2018 and subsequent to such exam, the direction of 11.06.2018 was issued, wherein 50% percentile marks was fixed for general candidate and for S.C. / S.T. and O.B.C. candidates it was 40% percentile etc. Therefore, it would show that principally after the students appeared in the exam the criteria of admission was changed. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the rule of the game was changed after the game was over can be applied in given set of facts. Consequently, the said ratio as was laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Dr. Ravikant Singh Rathore & anr. Versus State of Chhattisgarh & ors. (WPC No.914 of 208) & other connected matters would also govern the situation. In such case this Court has held that the Rules of selection cannot be changed adversely as against the interest of the competing candidates after they have appeared in examination.
18. In these context, in order to have the persuasive value the order passed by the Supreme Court in the matter of Association of Managements of Homeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharashtra Versus Union of India & ors. {Civil Appeal No.1393 of 2019} would be relevant. In that case the Supreme Court took notice of the fact that the order passed by the High Courts 14 of Patna, Karnataka, Madras, Rajasthan, Punjab & Haryana, Allahabad and Kolkata, wherein the directions were issued in favour of the students, permitting admission on the basis of marks in the qualifying examination, without reference to the marks secured by them in the NEET UG-2018 examination was allowed and the order reflects that the said directions given by the different High Courts have not been challenged. In such background when different High Courts have held in favour of students admitting them to the course of Ayurved & Homeopathy on the basis of qualifying exam, the uniformity must exist all over the country including to the students of this State too. A contrary view in facts of case would lead to confusion & chaos. So after careful consideration of facts it is held that in absence of regulation or order amending to the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 and Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 the direction given by letter dated 11.06.2018 prescribing a minimum percentile marks of 50% cannot be given effect too. As a result, the students both of Ayurveda and Homeopathy stream are entitled to get admission on the basis of the marks obtained in qualifying examination without reference to letter dated 11th June, 2018 on the basis of eligibility criteria mentioned before the examination of NEET held on 06.05.2018.
19. The perusal of the order passed in WPC No.3045 of 2018 on 14.11.2018 and the order passed in WPC No.133/2019 on 21.01.2019 would show that the date of counseling was extended by this Court. The perusal of the writ petitions would show that WPC No.112 of 2019 (Chhadamilal Chouksay Memorial Homeopathy Medical College Versus Union of India and others) was filed in the month of January, 2019, WPC No.465 of 2019 (Shri Jug Mahadev Education Society Versus Union of India & ors.) was filed on 13.02.2019 and WPC No.1020 of 2019 (Shreya Choubey Versus Union of India & ors.) was filed on 15 12.03.2019. The perusal of the order-sheets of this Court show that on each occasion the time was sought by the Union and State counsel to file reply, as such the delay cannot be attributed to the petitioners, therefore, it appears that there is no deliberate delay has been caused at the behest of the petitioners. At this juncture this Court can again be guided by the persuasive value of principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the Association of Managements of Homeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharashtra (supra) and direct the respondents to complete the process of admission strictly on the basis of merit by 25th of May, 2019 to the 1st Year of BAMS & BHMS. The managements of the colleges are directed to hold extra classes for students who will be admitted pursuant to this order to comply with the requirements of minimum working days.
20. With the aforesaid observation all the writ petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu