Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

up counselling from the NEET qualified candidates. Due to which, the fourth respondent/CENTAC sent a list of students in the ratio 1:10. In this backdrop, the petitioner did not have any response from the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 03:50:50 pm ) W.P.Nos.11995, 12506 & 12629 of 2018 students in the aforesaid ratio and hence, addressed a letter dated 30.08.2017 to the third respondent to permit them to call candidates from All India Basis, who secured NEET marks in the range of 355 to 107 to fill up the vacancies. Based on the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.30336/2016 dated 28.08.2017, the petitioner also made a representation on 31.08.2017 as no candidates reported them for admission to the third respondent to fill up from the NEET qualified candidates listed in the fourth respondent/CENTAC web-site and in this respect, he also filed a petition in W.P.No.23810 of 2017 which has been closed on the ground that the list had already been released by the second respondent/Government of Puducherry. In view of it, the petitioner on 31.08.2017 admitted 38 candidates from the list of NEET 2017 qualified merit candidates, who applied through the fourth respondent/CENTAC under Management quota downloaded from the fourth respondent web-site.

6.2.a) The subject matter in issue pertains to the admissions of MBBS students for the academic year 2017-18 which was completely done as per the procedure based on the common counselling conducted by the sixth respondent herein/CENTAC. He further submitted that the rank list was prepared by the CENTAC on NEET qualification. He added that after two rounds of counselling, mop up counselling was also conducted and the students were admitted on payment of prescribed fee. Even after mop up counselling, seats were available and in order to fill up those vacant seats, the petitioner requested the CENTAC to send the larger NEET list as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein it has held that the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), is at liberty to give the larger NEET list if 1:10 ratio merit list is exhausted. He also submitted that 41 students were admitted in their institution from the MBBS/BDS Courses Merit (2017-18) All India Quota (including Puducherry U.T.) furnished by the CENTAC and the same was uploaded in the portal of the MCI on 31.08.2017. In the meanwhile, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 03:50:50 pm ) W.P.Nos.11995, 12506 & 12629 of 2018 the second respondent/MCI passed the impugned order on 21.11.2017, for which a detailed explanation was given and the petitioner requested to drop the discharge order of 41 students. In effect of the order of the second respondent dated 21.11.2017, on 18.01.2018, the seventh respondent herein/Pondicherry University had passed the impugned order to comply with the orders of the respondents 2 and 5/MCI & DHFWS and also passed the proceeding of rejection for recognition of admissions of the said 41 students.

In W.P.No.12506 of 2018:

8.3. The learned counsel for the petitioners/Students of Sri Venkateswara Medical College Hospital and Research Centre submitted that, neither opportunities nor any notices were issued to the petitioners herein, seeking an explanation by the first respondent/MCI before passing the impugned order. He vehemently submitted that the first respondent ought to have taken into account, the relevant https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 03:50:50 pm ) W.P.Nos.11995, 12506 & 12629 of 2018 regulations by verifying that the petitioners' names were mentioned by the fourth respondent/CENTAC are within the additional merit list, including the main merit list for All India Category of candidates ,who have applied to the fourth respondent/CENTAC. He contended that without application of mind and proper verification, the first respondent/MCI had passed the impugned order to discharge 94 admitted students, out of which, 56 students were of Government quota and the remaining 38 students were admitted after exhaustion of 1:10 ratio merit list on 31.08.2017. He further contented that without application of mind had passed the discharge order of removal of 94 students, where 56 candidates were sponsored by the fourth respondent/CENTAC, which was admitted by the respondents 2, 3 & 4/Government of Puducherry and they have been admitted by the sixth respondent college from All India merit list given by the fourth respondent/CENTAC. As such, their admissions are done adhering to the norms and regulations. Thus, he prayed this Court to allow the Writ Petition.
10.6. The petitioner challenges the orders dated 21.11.2017, 06.12.2017, 18.01.2018 and 22.01.2018, stating that the MCI and Secretary to Government (Health)/respondents are the competent authorities to conduct counselling for admissions to MBBS and PG courses. The list of MBBS students admitted through the respondent CENTAC and approved by the respondent (MCI) could only be accepted and recognized as admissions were to be made through https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 03:50:50 pm ) W.P.Nos.11995, 12506 & 12629 of 2018 common counselling conducted by the designated authority of the respondent CENTAC as per the norms. The respondents stated that the petitioner College is affiliated with the respondent University and must adhere to the norms of the respondents viz., MIC, Secretary to Government (Health), Puducherry, CENTAC and Pondicherry University. Any violation of these conditions would invalidate the admission of students and result in other actions as specified in the Hon'ble Supreme Court directions. The respondent has instructed the petitioner College to adhere strictly to Government of India, Government of Puducherry, CENTAC and University norms.