^ IN THE HIQH COURT OF JUDICATURE. AT BILASBtlR CHHATTISQARH / Writ Petitkm No. ^^ •?-^/2003 / PETITIONERS NEERA DASH Aged about 18 years Daughter of Dr.R.K.Dash(Ex-Major) R/o. V/8 Amakherwa^ Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: ,/;' ...-?^^ .^^•" ^>" ^' "> & ^" wv' ^' ^t^r 1. State ofChhattisgarh Through the Secretary Department of Health, Family Welfare & Medical Education Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director Medical Education Qovemment of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Dean, Jawahar Lal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur,CG 4.Chhattisgarh Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Pension Bada» Raipur (C.G.) Through Controlter, PETITION UNDERARTICLES 226/227 OP THE CONSTITUTION OF'INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS Ij^^i?'^1^'- T~ 6 IN THE HIQH COl WritPc PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS : / ^-^^ ^^ .->^ •*•": ^ o \" v-^^y (^^ ;c-' ^. ^°<~'^\ ^ wA&^ JUt--^9 ^.p^to >s.s''" ~>^1 PETmON UNDER ARTICV -5. Na.^^^ ^«^^- FC^SSl?AN(^SIS ~5- N«t--ry^A^^^ -—t5?te.Arun ^ui-nsr paadsy' K/Q 40 cr^a Regionai off'Aee Anand Nagar, Raipur^92.ooi (C.hha.ttlsgayrf)** XI-HC-22 ^T^T^T f^-ti<=h ^TT^T . ^\^ ^f^a / . <; '•-. I- ^ST ^|^|td4, '^^T7TS, I^<n^^< ^W^l ^W^ 3n^r T^RF ,.....^.(?...S&3: 5Q3 200 ^Nf^T' 3n^T'?^<Trw^f^T 30-8-2003 5hri Tiwari, wlth petitioner. Shrl Samoy K, AarawaL Th© pQti+ioner has prl©f©rr|ed of the Constitution of 1\ 26»ot»2003publishcd by the re^pund^nts und the respondent No,5 aqain^t the re^ Th© of thc re^pond^nt No.l to 3 ar-©giving a€lrr|i^on women Sanlk cadre whereas, the r'es^ondcnt 51|iri counsel for th@ beputy AdvQcate &enerat for the cudre. / Mr. Kotnak Tiwari submitted of the Sanik or not, the wholejurisdiction The certlficate Issued by hlm Is th of the can be eandidate Qgdnst th©Sanik cQt©9 District Office, Annexure-P/10 in which it has been cgrtlficate In fQvour of respondent the are consldei^ing ths quota. ahl^d^'1 TYR^f 4 'feT3t <fa^K ^^rf^m^TT^T thi^ writ pe+i+ion under Artick |idla and the giving chonce for' udmission to •.rva+ion quota. the is the to rl©spond©ntNo.5 d9Gin^+ the No,5 does not to SQnik thQt QS per +h©rule^ to dedde th@ the es with the Secretary Soiders Board. only valid certificate thc and the petitioner is the eilgible jry quot@ @s per +h©Ruies and the a r^entloned that they havc not is^ucd any t^o.5 JyQtrPandcy Qnd in splte of that No.5 ©gainstSanik Cadre ^-~~~ XI-HC-22 >3TI^I^T ? f<Tli<=h 3H^T '^RW^ftn Barve ^ T^^TRI^PT, '^''^FTS, f®l<ni^< an^T xra^? Ml^crli5b^i<^''' 'a""""""""*"**'"***'W^ 20° •^^T' ^TT^T ^<fT8[R: ^if^T -z- Shri S.K. A9rQwal, Depu 1 to 4 very fairly sn^ the re^pondents wili admit the ^y Advocate ©enerai appearing for the frankly the Court that students in first year M.B.B.S. eour^e ^trjctly in accordance with the ttuie^ contdned in the broucher i^ued by th© respondents and that to^ r^spondent^ wiil ^crutinis^ aj candidates in order to scrutiny it Js found thot the resp the Rules, then the re^pondent^ are not going to giye admi^ion to the Couh^^iling is yet to +Gk& doeumerits strictjy In consononce JS Of Partjes are entitied for ce ahl^t<yl<Ii<l TTP:1^f"? 'fe^ <F'1^l< ^sri^m^n^r ; at the of the th© docurnent^/te^timoniGls of th© their eIigiblliTy for Qnd if on )ndent No.5 is not from Sanlk quotQ 03 pcr iac©in whieh QS p@r th©^ubm^ion^ mGd© by thc lcaKned Deputy Advocate ^enerd the respondentswill scrutinlze the ^ith sub-rule 5 of Rule 4 and expJQnation +o ^ub-rule 5 and th©ywil! give Q^mi^^ion^ onty to +he eligible cendidQ+e^ as per th© In view of the ^ubmi^sio^ made by the learned coun^ei for th@ respondents, at this sta9€,I do r|ot flnd any substarwe In the and urgurTient of the co^ns:ei for the petitioner Gnd bas:ed on the ^ubrpi^sion^ advanc&d by th©leor|ied beputy Advoeate 6enerQf, the petition tified copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge [^^fe^ ^k^