1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO.1056 OF 2010 Dr. Sonali Sudhir Zadbuke ... Petitioner Versus The Union of India and others. ... Respondents Mr. D.R. Dhanure for petitioner. Mr. Rohit R. Pandey with Mani Bajpai i/by Mr. Dhiren H. Shah for respondent No.1. Mr. S.S. Shah i/by Mr. Dinesh Pednekar for respondent No.2. Ms. N.V. Masurkar for respondent No.3. CORAM : J.N. PATEL, ACTING, C.J. & S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 11TH JUNE, 2010 P.C. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. We propose to dispose of this petition at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking admission in Diplomate of National Board (DNB) course which is conducted by the respondent No.2 Board. It is the case of the petitioner that she has passed her final examination from Government Medical College, Nagpur 2 held by the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik in November-December, 2006. Thereafter, the petitioner has satisfactorily completed Compulsory Rotating Internship Training period from 14.2.2007 to 13.2.2008 as required by the Rules prescribed by the University and is eligible for admission to the degree of M.B.B.S. Thereafter, the petitioner has been duly registered under Registration No.2008/07/2748 in Part-I of the Register under the Maharashtra Medical Council Act, 1965 and applied for postgraduate medical course in Diplomate of National Board (DNB) to the National Board of Examinations i.e. Respondent No.2. 2. The respondent No.2 conducted Centralized Entrance Test (DNB- CET) examination 2009 on 13th December, 2009. The petitioner has passed the said examination and qualified for admission to DNB training. The respondent No.3 institution invited applications for postgraduate medical course of DNB from the eligible candidates for DNB General Medicine (Board Specialities). As there were only two seats available in the said faculty for DNB General Medicine, the petitioner was at serial No.3 in the merit list and at serial No.1 in the wait list. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that Dr. Raylene Josinho Dias though joined the course, she resigned as DNB Trainee from Jagjivan Ram Hospital (Western Railway) on 26.3.2010, and therefore, the petitioner 3 has immediately applied on the same day itself and requested the said hospital to allow her to join as DNB Trainee from 26.3.2010 as the said seat has fallen vacant. She has also requested the said hospital to proceed for getting approval of the National Board of Examination viz. respondent No.2. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that as per clause 11 of the said guidelines, the first year seats vacated on the resignation of trainees are to be filled up latest by 15th March, 2010 for January session and by 15th September for July session and that the seats vacated after these dates are not to be filled up under any circumstances and shall remain vacant for the rest of the Academic Year. It is further made clear that carrying forward of such vacant seats into the next Academic Year is not permitted. It is, therefore, contended that clause 11 of the said guidelines is ultra vires to the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside and the petitioner should be allowed to be admitted against the said vacant seat. The respondents have filed their affidavit-in-reply. It is submitted that the rules do not permit filling up of the seats beyond the cut off date which in the case of the petitioner was 15th March, 2010. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be considered for admission to the course which has commenced from January, 2010. 4 5. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that for seeking admission in the subsequent session which is going to commence in July, 2010, the petitioner may not get admission in DNB General Medicine which is subject of specilisation the petitioner prefers to prosecute and, therefore, rather than permitting the seat to remain vacant, it will be in the interest of justice that the petitioner is given admission. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the decision of this court in the case of Dr. Nitin Panditrao Nere v. The Executive Director, National Board of Examinations and another (Writ Petition No.8062 of 2006 decided on February 20, 2007) and submitted that this is a fit case where the principle on the basis this court permitted the student to be admitted is applicable. Per contra, the respondents have drawn our attention to the decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh and others, AIR 2002 SC 3230 and Mridul Dhar (Minor) and another v. Union of India and others, AIR 2005 SC 666. So far as relief which is sought for by the petitioner of holding that clause 11 of the guidelines is ultra vires of Article 14 is concerned, the challenge does not survive in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of Madhu Singh and Mridul Dhar (supra). We find that the case of Dr. Nitin Panditrao Nere can safely be distinguished on the facts of that case 5 and the relief granted by this court was under extraordinary circumstances which is not the case of the petitioner. The two decisions of the Supreme Court in the field i.e. Madhu Singh and Mridul Dhar (supra) does not permit the respondents to admit any student for medical courses including the DNB Course conducted by the respondent No.2 after the cut off date. Admittedly, the seat felt vacant much after the cut off date and therefore, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered for admission. Hence, we are left with no choice but to dismiss the petition. 6. Before we part with the decision, we observe that in case the respondent No.2 proposes to admit any student for whatever reason against the seat which has fallen vacant upon resignation of Dr. Raylene Josinho Dias for the academic session commencing from January, 2010, they shall first offer the seat to the petitioner. With this observation, petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.