Allahabad High Court
Dr. Vivek Kumar Sachan vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 9 October, 2015
Bench: Arun Tandon, Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 35050 of 2015
Petitioner :- Dr. Vivek Kumar Sachan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bijay Singh Sachan,Radha Kant Ojha
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Wtih
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 55875 of 2015
Petitioner :- Dr. Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kripa Shanker
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 34118 of 2015
Petitioner :- Dr. Dinesh Singh Chauhan
Respondent :- Director, Medical And Health Services And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Singh,Indra Raj Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
These three writ petitions have been filed for the same relief.
Connect with Writ Petition No. 1380 of 2015.
We prima facie find that the allotment of seats for admission in Post Graduate courses under the PMHS quota, is challenged on the ground that the fixation of the criteria for providing reservation with reference to identified Public Health Centre and the incumbent working thereof is arbitrary.
The reservation for admission to Post Graduate courses in Medical Sciences to the extent of 30 per cent is provided under Government Order dated 28.2.2014 with the condition that all those incumbents, who have completed three years of service at distance and difficult backward areas of various districts to be identified by the State Government for over a period of three years, would be entitled to the benefit of said reservation.
According to the petitioner, it is for the State to appoint a Medical Officer at such PHC in the State as it deserves. The State has to declare such Primary Health Centre and Community Health Centre in a district as distant and difficult Health Centre. This according to the petitioner has resulted in selective benefit of reservation to be provided to few candidates by identifying particular centres by the State Government. It is further stated that at no point of time, the petitioner has made aware of such benefit of working petitioner has participated in UPPGMEE-2014. If three years of working are counted from the date of notification in 2014 then it would end in 2017 only.
We find prima facie substance in the contention raised. Time is being granted to the respondents to explain to the Court as to how the incumbent of PMS cadre could chose to work at a particular place so as to avail the benefit of reservation.
In the meantime, we issue following directions:
(a) An officer of the State may appear in person for explaining the actual implementation of reservation in admission to the Post Graduate courses qua, members of PMS cadre within 30 per cent quota with due regard to the identification of the Primary Health Centre / Community Health Centre on the basis of merit of such candidates.
(b) Admissions granted under the 30 per cent to Post Graduate courses shall be subject to the orders to be passed in the present writ petition and all the candidates will be informed of this order by the State Government in writing.
(c) The vacant seats within 30 per cent quota may be filled on the basis of merit of candidates of PMS cadre if possible otherwise now.
The matter shall be listed next before appropriate Bench on 30.10.2015.
State may file counter affidavit by the next date.
Order Date :- 9.10.2015
Ashish Pd.
