IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10738 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- DR.ABDUL WADOOD MOHAMMED, VALIYATHARAYIL HOUSE, EDAKAZHIYUR POST-680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT,KERALA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, NIRMAN BHAVAN,MOULANA AZAD ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICES, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICES, MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, NIRMAN BHAVAN,MOULANA AZAD ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, MEDICAL EDUCATION,DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICES,MEDICAL EDUCATION CELL, NIRMAN BHAVAN,NEW DELHI-110 001. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10738 OF 2009 (J) ===================== Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was an applicant for admission in All India Post Graduate Medical Course. He was included in the unreserved category. He was called for the first round of counselling held on 13/3/2009 by notification in the website. For reasons of his own, petitioner was absent. It is stated that the second round of counselling is to commence on 22nd of April, 2009 and the petitioner wants to be called for the second round of counselling. 2. What stands in the way of the petitioner is Clause 11(i) (c) of Ext.P5 prospectus, the relevant portion of which reads as under: (c) In the second round of allotment the candidates who had been allotted a seat in the 1st round and had joined the allotted college will be permitted for change of college/course in order of merit. The candidates who were absent or rejected or not joined or resigned after joining the seat allotted in the 1st resound of counselling will not be eligible to participate in the 2nd round of counselling. 3. A reading of this Clause shows that those who were absent in the first round of counselling will not be eligible to participate in the second round of counselling. It is because of WPC 10738/09 :2 : this provision that the petitioner is ineligible for the second round of counselling. Counsel submits that the said provision is violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. 4. I see no substance in the contention. In my view, unless there is a clause similar to this, is incorporated and if an applicant who was absent in the first round is allowed to participate in the second round and so on, it will upset the whole admission process itself and lead to chaos in the admission. This is what is sought to be avoided by the aforesaid clause. 5. In view of the above provision in the prospectus, petitioner cannot seek any direction to admit him for the second round of counselling. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp