Punjab-Haryana High Court
Madhurlata Ahluwalia (Dr.) (Mrs.) And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 28 April, 2008
Equivalent citations: (2008)151PLR385, AIR 2008 PUNJAB AND HARYANA 198, 2009 (1) ALL LJ NOC 81, 2009 (1) AIR KAR R 110, (2008) 3 SCT 179, (2009) 3 ESC 2038, (2008) 5 SERVLR 455, (2008) 3 PUN LR 385
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
JUDGMENT Vijender Jain, C.J.
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 6.12.2006 passed by the learned single Judge in CWP No. 12591 of 2006 vide which the claim of the appellants-petitioners to M.D. Homeopathy Course for the academic session 2006-07 as an external candidate was rejected, despite higher merit, on the ground that they were not eligible as they did not possess the certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship.
2. Broadly the facts of the case are that the appellants-petitioners, two in number acquired Diploma in Homeopathic Medicine & Surgery (DHMS) much prior to 1983. Till 1983 there was no requirement or availability of Compulsory Rotatry Internship after obtaining the diploma in Homeopathy. Both the appellants joined government service and have to their credit professional experience of more than 30 years as practising Homeopaths.
3. Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 issued an advertisement for admission to M.D. (Homeopathic) course for the academic session 2006-07 by advertisement dated 28/29.5.2006 (Annexures P-1 and P-2). The note appended in the advertisement provided as under:
Note DHMS with 10 years of professional experience shall be eligible for Admission in M.D. Course as External Candidate.
4. There were 27 seats provided for admission to external candidates out of total 45 in three subjects of M.D.(Homeopathic) course. The appellants ranked at merit No. 30 and 33 respectively as against 36 and 40 of respondent Nos.7 and 8. The appellants were denied admission at the time of counseling on the ground that there was a note appended in the prospectus which provided that "certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship was essential for seeking admission to M.D. (Homeopathic) course". Respondent Nos.7 and 8 were granted admission though being lower in merit than the appellants. Aggrieved by the said denial, appellants filed CWP No. 12591 of 2006.
5. The respondents upon notice filed their written statements.
6. The stand of respondent No. 1 i.e. Central Council of Homeopathy was that the appellants-petitioners fulfilled the criteria of eligibility laid down in the regulations framed by them and thus, they were eligible. It was further stated that the condition of Compulsory Rotatry Internship contained in the prospectus for admission to M.D. (Homeopathic) course for the academic session 2006-07 was contradictory/inconsistent with the provisions of Regulation 14, reproduced at page 8 of the paper book. The stand of the respondent Nos.3 and 5-Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot (hereinafter referred to as the University)/its Selection Committee is that though the Central Council of Homeopathy lays down the minimum standards of Homeopathic Medical Education, the University was well within its right to insist upon higher standards of Homeopathic Education and the said condition is a step towards the same.
7. The learned single Judge vide impugned judgment held that the University was competent to fix standards which were stringent than the one fixed by the Central Council of Homeopathy (respondent No. 1) and further held that requirement of possessing the certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship was essential and therefore, proceeded to dismiss the writ petition on the ground that the appellants-petitioners were ineligible since they did not possess certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship. Hence the present Letters Patent Appeal.
8. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
9. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the learned single Judge has failed to appreciate the fact that when the petitioners had passed their diplomas in Homeopathy, much prior to 1983, there was neither any requirement nor availability of Compulsory Rotatry Internship. It was further contended that while undergoing the Compulsory Rotatry Internship in the field of Homeopathy, the students are only introduced to the practical aspects of the theories, which they have studied during their course, by examining different patients and thus, by gaining experience endeavour to become better Homeopaths and since the appellants had more than 30 years of experience as practising Homeopaths, requirement of Compulsory Rotatry Internship in their case for admission to M.D. (Homeopathy) was redundant.
10. On the other hand, these contentions have not been seriously refuted by the counsel for the respondents.
11. In the facts and circumstances of the present case we are inclined to accept the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants.
It is undisputed that essence of homeopathic treatment lies in symptomatic diagnosis of the patients. Treatment is individualised (tailored to each person). Homeopathic practitioners select remedies according to a total picture of the patient including not only symptoms, but life-style, emotional and mental status and other factors. Typically in Homeopathy, patients have a lengthy first visit during which a Homeopath takes an in depth assessment of the patient. This is used to guide the selection of one or more homeopathic remedies. During follow up visits patients report how they are responding to the remedies, which help the practitioner make decision about further treatment. It is precisely this kind of technique, to which the students undergoing Compulsory Rotatry Internship are introduced to. In the present case, the appellants having more than 30 years of practice/practical experience in treating patients to their credit, cannot be held ineligible merely because they do not possess certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship as insistence on possessing such a certificate in their case for pursuing higher studies is absolutely meaningless bordering on absurdity.
12. There is another aspect of the matter. The note appended in the prospectus issued by the respondent-University reads as: "certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship was essential for seeking admission to M.D. (Homeopathic) course". The authorities/learned single Judge has lost sight of the fact that essential requirement was of undergoing Compulsory Rotatry Internship and if there was no Compulsory Rotatry Internship available, like in the case of appellants who passed DHMS prior to the year 1983, then it is manifestly clear that it cannot be considered essential qua them. Therefore, the appellants, who at the time of passing diploma in Homeopathy did not have the requirement or availability of undertaking of Compulsory Rotatry Internship, then insistence on their possessing certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship for considering them eligible for the post graduate course in Homeopathy is absolutely arbitrary. It is further undisputed that Central Council of Homeopathy(whieh governs the process of education of various courses in Homeopathy in all the Universities in country) has stated that in case of appellants-petitioners there is no requirement of Compulsory Rotatry Internship and as such they are eligible for admission to M.D. Course. It is also apparent from the records that the appellants-petitioners were higher in merit than respondents 7 and 8, who were admitted to post graduate course, as admission was denied to the appellants-petitioners only on the ground that they did not possess certificate of Compulsory Rotatry Internship.
13. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances, we deem it expedient and in the'interest of justice to declare that the appellants shall be considered eligible for admission to post graduate course in Homeopathy and further direct that on account of their higher merit than respondents 7 and 8, they will be granted admission in next academic session keeping in view the ratio of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Aman Deep Jaswal v. State of Punjab and Ors. 2006(2) R.S.J. 326.
14. We accordingly modify the order dated 6.12.2006 passed by the learned single Judge to the effect that the appellants shall be deemed to be eligible and entitled for admission to post graduate course in Homeopathy.
With the abovesaid directions this Letters Patent Appeal is allowed and the order dated 6.12.2006 of the learned single Judge is modified.