WA 162/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K.SHARMA Ranjan Gogoi, CJ (Acting) By our order dated 25.2.2010 passed in WA No. 162/2008 we had directed that the writ appellant, Dr. John Patowary should be admitted in the MDS Course for the a cademic session- 2010-2011 against one seat out of the State quota. We had also directed that, if possible, he should be given the subject of his choice i.e. Or thopaedics. The aforesaid direction of ours was passed in a situation where we h ad recorded the finding that one Dr. Arup Kr. Rabha had been wrongly granted adm ission in the academic session- 2008-2009 and that the writ appellant, Dr. John Patowary was wrongly kept out of the admission process of the said academic sess ion. It may also be noticed that our aforesaid directions were passed in a situa tion where Dr. Arup Kr. Rabha had completed more than half of the course and res ultantly Dr. John Patowary had remained out of the course for the same period. By instituting WP(C) No. 1593/2010, one Dr. Arunima Goswami had brought to our n otice that the entrance examination for admission to the MDS course of the year 2010-2011 has been finalised and in the result declared she had been placed at serial No.1 and the subject of her choice is also Orthopaedics. It also appears that another person i.e. Dr. Sandhya Tara Sonowal has been placed at serial No.2 of the said list. The fact that the entrance examination for the session 2010-2 011 had been completed and the results thereof had also been declared was not br ought to our notice at any point of time prior to our order dated 25.2.2010. The reasons therefor, which have also not been satisfactorily explained, however, w ill not be very important. But what would be of importance is the effect of our order dated 25.2.2010 on the selections already made. Persons who were not befor e the Court would be affected if our aforesaid order is to be implemented. Besid es, if any of the two persons selected i.e. Dr. Arunima Goswami and Dr. Sandhya Tara Sonowal is to be refused admission, which would be the inevitable result o f the implementation of our order dated 25.2.2010, the same would amount to depr iving them of their entitlements for no fault of their own. In the above circums tances, there being an error apparent on the face of our order dated 25.2.2010, we recall the directions contained in the said order dated 25.2.2010 in so far a s admission of the writ appellant, Dr. John Patowary for the said session is con cerned. The next question that has to be addressed is what modified relief, if any, that should be given to the appellant Dr. John Patowary. Our finding that Dr. John P atowary had been wronged by refusing admission for the academic session 2008-200 9 remains unaltered. It is, therefore, our considered view that the wrong commit ted to Dr. John Patowary, instead of being compensated in terms of money, can be more adequately addressed by continuing our previous direction to the academic session 2011-2012. Though it has been brought to our notice that for the said ac ademic session the subjects of Oral Surgery, Conservative Dentistry and Prosthod ontics are available against the State quota (Assam), from the deliberations tha t have taken place in the present case in the past few days, we have noticed fre quent change of subjects/ specialities allotted to the State of Assam and other North Eastern States. Such actions have been taken unilaterally by the Principa l of the Regional Dental College. The subject of Orthopaedics which Dr. John Pat owary prefers is not available to the State quota for the session 2011-2012. How ever, taking into account the changes in the allotment of subjects made from tim e to time, we are of the view that our direction to allot a seat to Dr. John Pat owary in the MDS Course for the academic session 2011-2012 should contain a furt her direction that if it is possible the subject of Orthodontics should be allot ted to Dr. John Patowary by suitable alteration of distribution of subjects/ spe cialities between the State of Assam and other North-Eastern States if the same can be done. Before parting with the records, we would like to observe that on being apprised of the facts contained in WP(C) No. 1593/2010, we had probed into the matter of admission to the MDS Course in the Regional Dental College at Guwahati. Our suc h probe has revealed that the process of admission suffers from some amount of l ack of transparency and have been marked by unilateral decisions taken by the Pr incipal in the matter of alteration of subjects/ specialities which defies logic al explanation. Without going into the details of the matter, we are of the view that to instill public confidence in the process of admission to high specialit y courses it is absolutely imperative on the part of the authority to maintain u tmost transparency and fairness which can be done by circulating to all concerne d the norms for admission including the choice of subjects/ specialities and als o indicating well in advance the particular subjects/ specialities which will be available to the prospective candidates in the years to come. The Principal of the Regional Dental College, Guwahati as well as the competent authority of the State Government shall act accordingly. With the aforesaid observations and directions, we modify our order dated 25.2.2 010 passed in WA No. 162/2008.