UGC’s anti-ragging system has utterly failed: Delhi HC

UGC’s anti-ragging system has utterly failed: Delhi HC

13.07.2025

Court mulls suo motu PIL petition to check surge in ragging episodes and student suicides; UGC’s anti-ragging helpline number recorded 1,084 complaints in 2024, the highest in past nine years 

SOIBAM ROCKY SINGH 13.07.2025

NEW DELHI In a strong rebuke to the University Grants Commission’s current anti-ragging framework, the Delhi High Court has signalled that it may initiate a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition to address the recent surge in ragging incidents and student suicides across higher educational institutions.

According to the latest 2022 National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report, students accounted for 7.6% — or 13,044 — of all suicide deaths in India, surpassing even the combined toll among farmers and agricultural labourers. Last year, the UGC’s anti-ragging helpline recorded 1,084 complaints, the highest in the past nine years.

“This system has utterly failed. You have not been able to do anything. Except every other day, there is a news report of a student death,” a Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed on Friday during the hearing on a petition filed by the Aman Satya Kachroo Trust (ASKT), a non-governmental organisation.

Questioning the effectiveness of the UGC’s anti-ragging system, the court observed, “Spending ₹44 lakh yearly for overseeing the welfare of 35 million students across the country — how do you justify this? You have to open your coffers.”

“This issue of ragging appears to be very superficial, but, if you ever met someone who have dropped out on account of ragging, only then you would realise. A person who commits suicide, we are never able to interact with,” the court had earlier remarked.

Supreme Court rap

The development comes just months after the Supreme Court, in March, expressed concern that the existing UGC regulations on curbing ragging remained largely on paper.

“...news reports have pointed out that tangible actions have not been taken by stakeholders other than mere formalities such as mandating undertakings from students and parents against indulging in ragging, and putting up no-ragging notices on university premises,” the Supreme Court had observed while ordering the registration of an FIR in the case of two students who ended their lives inside the campus of the IIT, Delhi, in 2023. It also directed the formation of a National Task Force to address mental health concerns among students.

Mental health crisis

A 2024 National Medical Commission survey of 37,000 postgraduate students revealed that 31% had suicidal thoughts, and 4.4% had attempted suicide within a year. Over 27% of postgraduates reported being ragged; 31% experienced abuse from faculty or seniors.

HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments

HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments 

State Opposes Interim Orders On PIL

By Advocate Sureshkumar.K@timesofindia.com 22.05.2025

Chennai : The operation of Tamil Nadu’s 10 state university laws, the passage of which by Supreme Court triggered a rare presidential reference plus a renewed Centre-state power tussle, was on Wednesday stayed by a vacation court of Madras high court. The bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan passed the interim orders amid objections made by Tamil Nadu advocategeneral P S Raman and senior advocate P Wilson, both representing the state. The public interest writ petition filed by advocate K Venkatachalapathy of Tirunelveli assailed the laws saying they were contrary to the objectives of regulations and functions of the University Grants Commission (UGC). “Through Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations for teaching staff, the commission granted power to the Chancellor (governor) to appoint the VCs. However, the state, through the amendments, replaced the power of the Chancellor with the govt, which is contrary to the process stipulated for appointing the VCs,” he said. “The state universities are recognised as universities within Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act and are also recognised by the commission under the applicable regulations. Therefore, any amendments made by the state affecting such universities, especially in areas already covered by the regulation concerning the appointment of VCs, constitute a violation of the constitutional distribution of powers,” he said. 

As announced by chief minister M K Stalin a few days ago, the Tamil Nadu govt moved Supreme Court seeking immediate release of ₹2,151 crore by the Union govt under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme, reports Sureshkumar K . The state accused the Union govt of coercive federal overreach by linking the disbursal of funds to TN’s acceptance of National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools scheme. Tamil Nadu wanted Supreme Court to order the recovery of ₹2,291 crore within a time frame to be fixed by the court, together with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal sum of ₹2,151 crore. The non-release of funds would affect as many as 43,94,906 students, 2,21,817 teachers and 32,701 staff members, Tamil Nadu said. 

‘Education should be in hands of authority above politics’ Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing the petitioner, contended on Wednesday that universities must be protected from political powers. The chancellor is apolitical like a Speaker of an assembly, and, therefore, education should be in the hands of an authority above politics, he submitted. 

In response, advocate general Raman said, “a legislation passed by a state Assembly can be stayed only when there is glaring unconstitutionality or if it is manifestly arbitrary. In the present case, a state legislation prevails over the regulations framed by the UGC.” So long as it does not contravene a law legislated by Parliament, the state law prevails, he said. 

The amendments got indirect assent from the governor due to the interference of the Supreme Court. The stand of the state is that the UGC does not have the power to constitute a search committee to appoint vice chancellors, Raman added. Wilson sought adjournment saying a petition to transfer of all the related cases to the Supreme Court was pending in the apex court and that arguing the matter now before the high court would leave the pending pleas infructuous. Asserting that there was no urgency to hear the PIL in a vacation sitting, both requested the court to adjourn the hearing and provide time for the state to file its counter. However, refusing any adjournment, the bench heard the petition until 7pm on  Wednesday and passed the interim order. In his submissions, Wilson said the governor was waging a war against the state govt. “The PIL is politically motivated. Except for a grudge to stay the selection process, there is no urgency in the issue,” he said. “Only the process for the appointment of vice-chancellors has commenced. The last date to receive applications is only on June 5. There is no urgency; the apprehension of the petitioner that something will happen tomorrow is unfounded,” the AG said. Wilson said the petitioner, a BJP district secretary from Tirunelveli, chose to move this particular second vacation court, and added: “This is forum shopping. It will be judicial impropriety if the petitioner is allowed to argue,” Wilson said.

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities Sagar Kumar Mutha

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities Sagar Kumar Mutha

Mar 18, 2025, 0:23 IST

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities

Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Monday issued notices to the central government's higher education department and the University Grants Commission (UGC) asking them to explain their stand within two weeks on the contentions raised by Telangana over the alleged usurping of the state's powers in matters of higher education and in allowing deemed universities to come up in Telangana without the state's approval. 

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara was hearing a writ petition filed by the education secretary and also the commissioner of technical education and collegiate education who challenged the 2023 regulations of the UGC that eliminated the role of the state in matters of issuing essentiality certificates for such deemed universities. 

Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy said that some of these colleges "which look like mulgis (small shops)" were emerging as deemed universities on one hand and, as if this were not enough, these deemed varsities were setting up off-campus centres everywhere in an indiscriminate manner. 

"The latest regulations allow nondescript colleges to apply for deemed status, and if the essentiality certificate does not arrive within 60 days, these colleges will automatically get deemed university status," he said. 

What happens to the students if these deemed universities close shops overnight? It becomes the state's duty to protect the interests of the students. But the state was not allowed to say whether such a university is essential to come up in a particular area, Sudarshan said. 

The bench wondered whether the state counsel was describing these deemed universities as doomed universities and sought to know from the authorities what happens if the state rejects the application within 60 days. 

Though Section 20 of the Education Act thrusts responsibility on the state to scan before allowing the establishment of such colleges, let alone universities, the UGC says there is no need for an NOC from the state, the AG said. 

Citing the case of KL University, which was recently embroiled in allegations of fraud, the AG said the UGC does not take action against such institutions, and that the state was rendered helpless. "Who will monitor the situation in a global city like Hyderabad where the standards of higher education are required to be on a higher pedestal?" the AG asked while urging the court to scrap regulations which he said were inconsistent with the goal of quality education.

These unfair regulations crept into the UGC through amendments in 2010, 2016, 2019 and 2023, he said, requesting the court to stay them as an interim measure to protect the education field and the reputation of Hyderabad. 

The bench sought answers from the UGC and the centre within two weeks.The bench also issued notices to KL University, Aurora Deemed University, Malla Reddy deemed university, Symbiosis, Chaitanya and Vignan deemed universities.

HC allows 8 doctors to appear in pre PG exam despite internship issue

HC allows 8 doctors to appear in pre PG exam despite internship issue 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 03.05.2025

Bhopal : A division bench of the MP high court has allowed eight doctors to appear in the prePG exam despite not completing the three years of internship. They claimed that their internship period was two years when they began their internship in MP after completing their MBBS from China, but it was later extended to three years. They challenged the extension of the internship period, arguing that the rules of the game should not be changed midway. 

The eight doctors in question, including Dr Saurabh Rafguvanshi from Vidisha and Dr Jai Sharma from Ujjain, said they took admission in the MBBS course in China in 2017. They returned home in 2019 following the outbreak of the Corona pandemic and completed their MBBS course online after returning to India. Students who completed MBBS from abroad required one year of internship to get registration as a doctor in MP, but during the Corona period, it was extended to two years. Their internship period would have ended on March 31, 2025, but in November 2024, it was extended to three years. 

Appearing for the doctors, senior counsel Aditya Sanghi said the National Medical Commission extended the internship period for students doing MBBS from Ukraine and the Philippines due to the war in Ukraine, but the MP Medical Council applied it to all students who completed MBBS from abroad. He argued that the extension of the internship period was challenged in the MP High Court. Meanwhile, pre-PG medical exams are due in June and July, and the last date for filling the form for the exam is June The bench of justices Sanjeev Sachdeva and Vinay Saraf, while issuing notices to respondents, asked the MP Medical Council to allow the eight doctors to appear in the pre-PG exam.

Employer Can't Alter Recorded D.O.B. Of Government Employee Beyond Prescribed 5-Year Period From Date Of Initial Appointment : Calcutta HC

Employer Can't Alter Recorded D.O.B. Of Government Employee Beyond 

Prescribed 5-Year Period From Date Of Initial Appointment : Calcutta HC

Namdev Singh

23 Apr 2025 10:53 AM

The Calcutta High Court bench comprising of Aniruddha Roy, J. held that an employer cannot unilaterally alter the recorded date of birth of a government employee beyond the prescribed five-year limitation period from the date of joining.

Background Facts

The petitioner joined her employment in the year 1987 after submission of all the relevant records and documents. The employer issued identity card in favour of the petitioner. The date of issuance was April 8, 2005 which showed that the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as October 16, 1967, also which was correct as per the petitioner. The employment of the petitioner became permanent in the year 2009. The necessary service book was prepared and maintained by the employer since then. For the first time in 2024 at the time of scrutiny of the service book, the employer found out that the date of birth of the petitioner was to be October 16, 1965 instead of October 16, 1967.

Accordingly, the employer changed the date of birth in the service book to be as October 16, 1965 after obtaining an approval from the DIG of Correctional Services. Aggrieved by it, the petitioner filed a plea to accept her date of birth to be October 16, 1967. The Special I.G. of Correctional Service passed its order dated September 24, 2024, relying upon the Government Memorandum dated January 24, 2012, whereby it was held that the prayer for change in Date of Birth was considered and rejected on the ground of limitation on time period of five years from the date of joining, during which any prayer for change in date of birth of a Govt. employee can be entertained.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition.

It was submitted by the petitioner that, at the time of appointment the petitioner had disclosed and submitted all the necessary records where upon due scrutiny and verification was held and only then the petitioner was appointed. The petitioner was also made permanent on the basis of such records and the service book was also prepared accordingly.

Referring to the memorandum dated January 24, 2012 issued by the State, it was submitted by the petitioner that the State has provided a time frame for a period of five years from the joining in the Government service, for any correction to be made. It was further stated that the petitioner came to know about the dispute regarding her date of birth from the communication dated January 3, 2024 which was few decades after the joining of service. Therefore, it was contended that the Government Order/Memorandum would not apply. Lastly, it was contended by the petitioner that the reasons rejecting the plea to accept the date of birth of petitioner to be October 16, 1967 were bad in law and should be set aside.

On the other hand, the state in support of its action, submitted a report dated April 2, 2025 issued by the Officer-in Charge, Law Cell, Directorate of Correctional Services, which provided discrepancy regarding the date of birth of the petitioner:

“In the Primary School Leaving Certificate submitted by the Petitioner issued on 16.11.1985 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School, the date of birth of Smt. Sabita Sen Kundu is 16.10.1967.

Another Primary School Leaving Certificate was issued on 12.06.2001 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School wherein the date of birth of the Petitioner is recorded as 16.10.1965.

Another Primary School Leaving Certificate submitted by the petitioner which was issued on 08.09.2020 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School, the date of birth of Sabita Sen Kundu is recorded as 16.10.1967.

In the Police Verification Roll which was verified by the Superintendent of Police during the year 2021, the date of birth of the Petitioner is 16.10.1967.”

It was further submitted by the state that the multiple sets of records were produced by the petitioner and after scrutiny of those records, the authority came to a finding that the recording of date of birth to be as October 16, 1967 should not have been done, as the contrary record showed the same to be October 16, 1965.

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the court that the Government Memorandum dated January 24, 2012, stated that, if anybody seeks correction of recording of date of birth such prayer has to be made within the period of five years from the joining in the Government service. Therefore, it was observed by the court that after decades of joining in the service the petitioner for the first time from the communication dated January 3, 2024, came to know about the dispute with regard to recording the date of birth raised by the employer. Therefore, the employer's action in altering the date of birth beyond the prescribed five-year period from the commencement of service was improper.

It was held by the court that the impugned communication dated September 24, 2024 was bad in law. Therefore, it was set aside and quashed by the court. The respondent and jurisdictional authority was directed by the court to record the Date of Birth of the petitioner as October 16, 1967 wherever it was required to be recorded in the service record of the petitioner. Further it was held by the court that the retirement of the petitioner shall take place on the basis of the Date of Birth being October 16, 1967 and the relevant calculation of terminal benefits should accordingly be done.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was allowed.

Case Name : Sabita Sen v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case No. : W.P.A. 4656 of 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner : Anirban Bose, Chandrachur Biswas, Satyajit Senapati

Counsel for the Respondents : Jhuma Chakraborty, Munmun Tewary

Man threatens Delhi judge in court after adverse order ‘Accused Also Tried To Throw An Object At Judge’

Man threatens Delhi judge in court after adverse order ‘Accused Also Tried To Throw An Object At Judge’ 

Vineet.Upadhyay@timesofindia.com 22.04.2025

New Delhi : In a shocking incident, a man and his lawyer recently threatened a woman judge inside a courtroom in Delhi after conviction in a six-year-old cheque bounce case. On April 2, a 63-year-old retired govt school teacher lashed out in court after he was convicted by judicial magistrate first class (Negotiable Instruments Act) Shivangi Mangla for an offence punishable under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Act. The teacher had been directed to furnish bail bonds under Section 437A CrPC on the next date of hearing, April 5. 

The judge said in her order that the man, besides issuing a threat, also attempted to hurl an object at her for not ruling in his favour. “After hearing the judgement not in favour of the accused, the accused erupted with anger on the judge in open court as to how the judgment of conviction could be passed. The accused started harassing the judge in open court in unofficial Hindi language with commentary against the mother of the judge. The accused was also holding some object and he tried to throw it at the judge… Then, he ordered his advocate to do anything to get the judgment in his favour,” the judge observed in her order. 

She said the accused and his counsel harassed her both mentally and physically, pressuring her to resign from her post and “acquit the accused, (saying) else they will file a complaint against me and forcibly arrange my resignation,” the judge said. The judge said in the order that she would be taking appropriate measures against the accused before National Commission for Women. She also issued a showcause notice to the convict's lawyer, advocate Atul Kumar, asking him to explain why the matter should not be referred to Delhi High Court for criminal contempt proceedings to be initiated against him for misbehaving with her. The convict’s counsel appeared before the court on April 5 and submitted that the convict was a retired govt teacher, surviving on a pension, and he had three dependent sons.

MP High Court Orders Medical College To Return Original Documents Of Student Who Wished To Leave His Seat & Return To Home State

MP High Court Orders Medical College To Return Original Documents Of Student Who Wished To Leave His Seat & Return To Home State

Anukriti Mishra

17 Apr 2025 7:00 PM

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed Government Bundelkhand Medical College in Sagar to return the original documents of a student from Manipur along with No-Objection Certificate who stated that he wants to quit his three-year course in Second year and return to his home state due to unforeseen circumstances therein.

The student had moved the high court after the college had asked him to deposit Rs. 30 Lakh to leave the seat invoking the provision of the Madhya Pradesh Medical Education Admission Rules 2018. The plea challenges the provision of the rules as ultra vires of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. As interim relief the plea sought a direction to the college to give back his original certificates immediately so that he can pursue the next post graduation course in his home state, during the pendency of the plea.

A division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain while issuing notice on the plea in its order said, “The respondent No.3 is directed to return the original documents along with No Objection Certificate to the petitioner on due acknowledgement and the same shall remain subject to final outcome of the writ petition.”

According to the plea, the petitioner was granted admission in the course of MD (Physiology) in Government Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar (Respondent No.3) in the Sessions 2022-23 from All India Quota as an OBC Category candidate. However, the petitioner has said that he wants to leave the seat for various personal reasons and circumstances and wants to re-appear in NEET (Pre-PG) Examination, 2025.

As per the plea, due to unforeseen circumstances in the State of Manipur which is the home State of the petitioner, the petitioner has to rush to his home State and has to pursue his further studies only in the North-East States of India because of his parents and female members in the family. It is stated that the petitioner had to take a decision to leave the seat in the interest of his family and stay in North-East as he is the only active male member in the entire family.

The petitioner had submitted all his original documents to the college at the time of admission. To pursue his further studies in the North-East, the NOC as well as the original documents are required immediately for admission. The said documents are being denied by Respondent No. 3 on the ground that as per the M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018, an amount of Rs. 30 lacs have to be deposited.

Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018 states that if a person leaves the seat allotted to him then he has to deposit Rs. 30,00,000/- as a seat leaving condition in favour of the college. It is contended that since the petitioner belongs to lower-strata of the society, it is not possible for him to pay such a hefty fee.

It is also contended that the State govt abolished the Rs. 30 lakh penalty rule in 2025 on advice of National Medical Commission.

Therefore, the petition has been filed on the ground that Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018, in which a demand of Rs.30,00,000/- for leaving the seats of post-graduation by the petitioner is ultra vires to Article 14 (Right to Equality) & 19(1)(g) (Right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution of India.

Thus, the petitioner prayed to declare Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018 as ultra vires to Article 14 & 19(1)(G) of the Constitution of India and to return original documents of the petitioner and grant him No-Objection Certificate.

During the hearing on April 8, the Court directed Government Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar to return the original documents along with No Objection Certificate to the petitioner.

Case Title: Dr. Thongam Yaiphaba Singh Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others, Writ Petition No. 6922 Of 2025

Counsel for Petitioner: Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi

Counsel for Respondent/State: Advocate Ritwik Parashar

Madras HC imposes ₹5L on TN govt for ‘unnecessary’ appeal

Madras HC imposes ₹5L on TN govt for ‘unnecessary’ appeal 

Sureshkumar.k@timesofindia.com 08.03.2025

Chennai : An ‘unnecessary’ appeal in Madras high court has cost Tamil Nadu govt₹5 lakh. Adivision bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice G Arul Murugan imposed the cost on the govt for ‘unnecessarily’ moving an appeal against the appointment of a sanitary worker to a minority-aided college. 

The judges observed that although the state govt had the power to regulate appointments in govt aided colleges, this cannot be done through administrative orders that contradict the existing rules. The issue pertains to a plea moved by St Christopher’s College of Education, Vepery, Chennai, challenging a GO rejecting the approval of the appointment of a sanitary worker for the college.

As a single judge of the court allowed the plea and ruled in favour of the college, the state moved the present appeal. The court said, “This unnecessary appeal by the govt challenges the order of the single judge, which directed approval of the appointment of a sanitary worker in the respondent college, which is admittedly a minority institution.” 

No doubt, the govt has the power to regulate appointments in govt-aided colleges, but that cannot be done through administrative orders that contradict the existing rules. We, therefore, see no merit in the appeal. This writ appeal fails, and it is accordingly dismissed, the judges said. Since we find that this appeal is a re-agitation of a matter settled by the court and approved by the Supreme Court, we impose a cost of ₹5,00,000 on the govt, the court said.

Biometrics block Aadhaar update, man moves HC

Biometrics block Aadhaar update, man moves HC

BIOMETRIC DATA TAKEN 12 YEARS AGO DO NOT MATCH, HIGH COURT SEEKS REPLY FROM UIDAI OFFICIALS

23.01.2025

TIMES NEWS NETWORK Ahmedabad : The Gujarat high court has sought a response from the ministry of electronics and information technology’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) over a petition from an individual facing difficulties in updating his Aadhaar card. The issue stems from his current biometrics not matching those recorded during his childhood. Mohammed Mansuri, 22, participated in a 2011 Aadhaar registration camp held in his locality at Raikhad in Ahmedabad when he was eight years old.

Along with other residents, he queued up for biometric recording and subsequently received his Aadhaar card. When attempting to update his Aadhaar in Sep 2023, particularly to replace his childhood photograph and for correction in his birthdate, he submitted an application to UIDAI but encountered no success. Officials informed him about the biometric mismatch with their recorded data. He made another attempt unsuccessfully in April 2024, Mansuri mentioned in his petition.

Through his lawyer Aziz Alvi, Mansuri presented two possibilities to the HC: either incorrect biometrics were recorded in his Aadhaar in 2011, or his biometrics have altered over time. Seeking the HC’s directive to UIDAI for updating his Aadhaar, Mansuri stated in his petition, “The petitioner is in need to update his Aadhaar card but due to the nonmatching of the biometrics, the respondent authority has not updated the Aadhaar card because they are dependent upon the matching of the biometrics.” Justice Aniruddha Mayee, after an initial hearing, has issued a notice asking for UIDAI’s response by Feb 28

For now, take affidavit route to register name change: HC

For now, take affidavit route to register name change: HC 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 16.02.2025

Bengaluru : The high court has said until adequate amendments are made to the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the Rules regarding change of name of children, the authorities can adopt a procedure calling upon applicant-parents to give a sworn affidavit to the effect that they have changed the name of their ward on their own accord and request that the entries in the birth register be changed accordingly.

Justice NS Sanjay Gowda gave this direction while allowing a petition filed by a three-year-old boy, represented by his mother Deepika Bhat of Udupi. “It is, however, made clear that in case of deaths, the question of changing the name would not arise and hence, these directions would be inapplicable,” the judge added.

The petitioner had requested the registrar of births and deaths, Udupi, that his name be changed from Adhrith Bhat to Shrijith Bhat as the former was astrologically not proper. However, on Nov 4, 2023, an endorsement was issued rejecting the request, citing that neither the Act nor the Rules provide for the same. The endorsement was challenged before the high court. 

Justice Gowda noted that since there is no provision under the Act or the Rules for a change of name, a piquant situation has arisen which requires resolution in such a manner that neither authorities nor the applicants are prejudiced. In the absence of legislation prescribing a procedure for changing the name of a person and until a relevant law is enacted, parents could give a sworn affidavit to the effect that they have changed the name of the child on their own accord and the entries in the birth register be changed accordingly. 

“The authorities should verify the identity of the parents and proceed to incorpo rate the changed name in the register of births. The authorities, in order to ensure that there is no attempt to create a record for ulterior purposes, should make a remark in the register stating that the name of the child was changed subsequently pursuant to a request made by the parents,” the judge said, adding that the register would mention both the original and new names. “In fact, even in respect of an adult who seeks a change of name, the same procedure can be adopted,” Justice Gowda said, directing that the procedure he laid out be followed and name change be permitted in the register of births and deaths. 

With regard to the petitioner, the judge directed for entry in the register of births and also in the birth certificate to the effect that Adhrith Bhat is changed to Shrijith Bhat.

Anna University V-C writes to higher education dept on IoE issue

The IoE tag will immensely benefit educational institutions.

Published: 07th August 2019 04:41 AM |

By Express News Service

CHENNAI: Vice-Chancellor of Anna University, MK Surappa on Tuesday wrote a letter to the state government seeking its support to help the varsity in getting the Institution of Eminence (IoE) tag.

The move comes after University Grants Commission(UGC) announced that Anna University can be considered for the IoE tag only after the state governments issue an official communication allocating their share of the funds (which is up to 50 per cent). The UGC has recently recommended 20 institutions for grant of the IoE status.

“I have written to the higher education department seeking all kinds of support for the IoE tag. The department will have to issue letter of intent with clarity on quantum of funds to be allocated to the
university following which only we will be able to get the IoE tag,” said Surappa.

‘The official communication from the state higher education department is necessary for us in order to get the status. Hence, the state government should take up the issue on a priority basis,” said a senior administrative official of Anna Univeristy.


The IoE tag will immensely benefit educational institutions. According to reports, the IoEs are proposed to have greater autonomy compared to other higher education institutions. The objective behind the tag was to give the selected IoEs wide-ranging autonomy by the government in administrative and financial matters so that they can emerge as world-class universities over a reasonable period of time.

Speaking to Express on the issue, the higher education secretary, Mangat Ram Sharma said the state government will take all measures to help Anna University get the IoE tag.

“We are yet to receive any official communication from the UGC or HRD ministry regarding Anna University issue on IoE. But whatever is required will be done to ensure that Anna University gets the IoE  tag," said Sharma

MSU stops admissions at affiliated colleges with unqualified faculty

TNN | Jun 10, 2019, 04.44 AM IST

Madurai: Manonmaniam Sundaranar University (MSU) in Tirunelveli has issued warnings to all its affiliated colleges that they will not be able to conduct admissions this year for particular courses in which they have faculty who didn’t satisfy the qualification norms set by the University Grants Commission (UGC).

Speaking to TOI, registrar of MSU S Santhosh Baboo said that the warnings and instructions were not given to the colleges in the last minute, but a while back so that they had sufficient time to satisfy the norms. “We got lists from all the colleges regarding the courses that had unqualified staff and based on that, we gave instructions to the colleges to not admit students in those programmes. We are very serious about the teaching faculty satisfying the qualification norms as it’s a court direction,” he added.

There are a total of 91 colleges under MSU and according to sources, due to this decision by the university, it is the mathematics and English courses in most of these colleges that are under threat.

“Most of the colleges are not able to get the faculty with necessary qualifications only in mathematics and English and hence holding admissions is an issue in these. In a few cases, commerce programme is a problem as well,” the source said.

Santhosh Baboo said that though the university has stopped the admissions at certain colleges, the institutions would be immediately permitted to resume admissions, provided they managed to ensure necessary steps were taken so that the concerned courses had only qualified staff. He added that to satisfy the UGC norms, the teachers should have either cleared National Eligibility Test (NET)/ State Eligibility Test (SET) or completed PhD.

'பெற்றோருக்கு வீடு இருந்தாலும் பெண்ணுக்கு ஜீவனாம்சம் அவசியம்'
பதிவு செய்த நாள்14ஆக
2017
23:59


புதுடில்லி: 'திருமணமான பெண், குடும்ப பிரச்னையால், கணவர் வீட்டை விட்டு வெளியேற்றப்படும் சூழ்நிலையில், அவருக்கு, நிதி பாதுகாப்பு ஏற்படுத்தப்பட வேண்டியது அவசியம்' என, டில்லி நீதிமன்றம் கருத்து தெரிவித்துஉள்ளது.

டில்லியை சேர்ந்த ஒரு பெண், தன் கணவர் மற்றும் அவர் குடும்பத்தினர், வரதட்சணை கேட்டு கொடுமைப்படுத்துவதாக, கீழ் நீதிமன்றத்தில் வழக்கு தொடர்ந்தார். வழக்கை விசாரித்த நீதிமன்றம், குடும்ப வன்முறை வழக்கில் தீர்ப்பு அளிக்கப்படும் வரை, அந்த பெண்ணுக்கு, மாதம், 20 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் ஜீவனாம்சம் அளிக்க உத்தரவிட்டது. இந்த தீர்ப்பை எதிர்த்து, கூடுதல் செஷன்ஸ் நீதிமன்றத்தில், பெண்ணின் கணவர் முறையீடு செய்தார். 'அந்த பெண், 2006ல், வழக்கறிஞராக பதிவு செய்தவர்; தன் பெற்றோர் வீட்டில் வசித்து வருகிறார்' என, மனுவில், கணவர் கூறியிருந்தார். இந்த வழக்கை விசாரித்த, நீதிபதி, தீபக் கார்க் பிறப்பித்த உத்தரவு: கணவர் வீட்டில் வசிக்க இயலாத சூழ்நிலை ஏற்பட்டு, வீட்டை விட்டு வெளியேறும் பெண்ணுக்கு, நிதி பாதுகாப்பு ஏற்படுத்த வேண்டியது அவசியம். அந்த பெண்ணின் பெற்றோருக்கு சொந்தமாக வீடு இருந்தாலும், அந்த வீட்டை விட்டு வெளியேறும் சூழ்நிலை ஏற்பட்டால், தனியாக வாழ முடியும் என்ற நம்பிக்கை ஏற்பட வேண்டும்.இந்த வழக்கில், கீழ் நீதிமன்றம் அளித்த உத்தரவு உறுதி செய்யப்படுகிறது. குடும்ப வன்முறை வழக்கு முடியும் வரை, அந்த பெண்ணுக்கு, மாதம், 20 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் ஜீவனாம்சம் தரப்பட வேண்டும். இவ்வாறு நீதிபதி, தீபக் கார்க் உத்தரவு பிறப்பித்தார்.

சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணையதளம் நவீன வடிவில் புதுப்பொலிவு பெறுகிறது: பார்வையற்றோரும் ஒலி வடிவில் தகவல்களை அறியலாம் ....... டி.செல்வகுமார்

சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணைய தளம் பல்வேறு புதிய தகவல்களுடன் புதுப்பொலிவு பெறுகிறது. பார்வையற்றோரும் ஒலி வடிவில் தகவல்களை பெறும் வகையில் நவீன முறையில் வடிவமைக்கப்படுகிறது.

சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றத்தில், மனு தாக்கல் செய்வதில் இருந்து தீர்ப்பு பெறும் வரை ஒவ்வொரு நடைமுறைக்கும் விதி முறைகள் உள்ளன. இதுகுறித்த அனைத்து தகவல்களையும் உள்ளடக்கிய இணையதளத்தை புதிதாக வடிவமைக்கும்படி உயர் நீதிமன்ற தலைமை நீதிபதி எஸ்.கே.கவுல் உத்தரவிட்டார்.

அதன்படி, உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணையதளத்தை பல்வேறு அம்சங்களுடன் புத்தக வடிவில் மறுவடிவமைப்பு செய்ய 6 மாதங் களுக்கு முன்பு திட்டமிடப்பட்டது. இதையடுத்து தேசிய தகவல் மையத்திடம் விவாதிக்கப்பட்டது. அந்த மையம், இணைய தளத்தின் சில மாதிரிகளை அளித்தது. அவற்றை நீதிபதி ராம சுப்பிரமணியன் தலைமையிலான கம்ப்யூட்டர் குழு பார்வையிட்டது. இணையதளத்தின் மாதிரிகளில் இருந்து ஒன்றை கம்ப்யூட்டர் குழு தேர்வு செய்தது. அதற்கு உயர் நீதிமன்ற தலைமை நீதிபதி ஒப்புதல் அளித்தார்.

இதைத் தொடர்ந்து சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணையதளத்தை புதுப்பிப்பதற்கான மென் பொருள் உள்ளிட்ட உபகரணங்கள் வாங்கு வதற்கு ஆரம்பகட்ட தொகையை தேசிய தகவல் மையத்துக்கு உயர் நீதிமன்றம் வழங்கியது. இதையடுத்து, உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணையதளம் புதிய தொழில்நுட்பத்தில் வடி வமைக்கப்படுகிறது. இதில், நீதித்துறை தொடர்பான அனைத்து தகவல்களையும் பொதுமக்கள் பார்த்து தெரிந்து கொள்ளலாம். பார்வையற் றோரும் ஒலி வடிவில் தகவல் களை தெரிந்துகொள்ள முடியும்.

மக்களுக்கு பொதுவாக எழும் சந்தேகங்கள் (எப்.ஏ.க்யூ), வழக்கு தாக்கல் செய்யும்போது பின்பற்ற வேண்டிய விதிமுறைகள் உள் ளிட்ட அம்சங்கள் புதிதாக சேர்க் கப்படுகின்றன. இதன்மூலம், மனு தாக்கல் செய்யும் பிரிவில் பணிபுரியும் ஊழியர்கள் மற்றும் இளம் வழக்கறிஞர்களிடையே ஏற்படும் பிரச்சினைகளுக்கு முற்றுப்புள்ளி வைக்கப்படும்.

இதுகுறித்து உயர் நீதிமன்ற உயர் அதிகாரி ஒருவர் ‘தி இந்து’விடம் கூறியதாவது:

சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற இணையதளம் புதுப்பொலிவுடன் வடிவமைக்கப்படுகிறது. இதில், உயர் நீதிமன்ற வளாகத்தில் கம்பீரமாக காட்சியளிக்கும் பழமையான, பராம்பரியமிக்க கட்டிடங்கள் பிரமாண்டமாக இடம்பெறுகின்றன.

பொதுவான சந்தேகங்கள் (எப்.ஏ.க்யூ.) உள்ளிட்ட புதிய விஷயங்கள் இணையதளத்தில் சேர்க்கப்படுவதால், அதுதொடர் பான தகவல்கள் திரட்டப் படுகின்றன. ஊழியர்கள் பற் றாக்குறையால் இப்பணி தாமதமாகிறது. புதிய நீதிபதி களின் சொத்து விவரம், சட்டக் கமிஷனின் சுற்றறிக்கை, பொது மக்களுக்கு பயனுள்ள உச்ச நீதிமன்றத் தீர்ப்புகள் உள் ளிட்டவற்றை தலைமை நீதிபதி ஒப்புதல் பெற்ற பிறகுதான் இணையதளத்தில் பதிவேற்றம் செய்ய முடியும். இதுவும் தாமதத்துக்கு ஒரு காரணம். இன்னும் 3 மாதங்களில் சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றத்தின் இணையதளத்தை 100 சதவீத தகவல்களுடன் புதிய வடிவமைப்பில் பார்க்கலாம்.

இவ்வாறு அந்த அதிகாரி தெரிவித்தார்.

High Court ruling on claim for quota

Candidates who had pursued their schooling as well as graduation through Tamil medium of instruction but had completed postgraduation alone through English medium are not entitled to preference in government jobs to Tamil medium candidates if the minimum qualification required for those jobs happened to be a Master’s degree, the Madras High Court Bench here has ruled.

A Division Bench of Justices S. Manikumar and G. Chockalingam passed the order while dismissing a writ appeal filed by J. Stephen Raja, an aspirant to the post of Postgraduate Assistant in economics being filled up by the Teachers Recruitment Board at the behest of the School Education Department and in pursuance of a recruitment notification issued on November 7, 2014 calling for applications.

The judges pointed out that the recruitment notification categorically stated that those applying for the PG Assistant post must possess a postgraduation degree in the relevant subject apart from a Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree and that the candidates should have studied the same subject, for which they had applied, in their graduation as well as postgraduation courses.

“Though the appellant had studied the same subject (economics) in graduation as well as postgraduation and had obtained B.Ed., degree in Tamil medium, he had not obtained M.A. in economics through Tamil medium. Thus, he cannot be said to be a person eligible to seek appointment under the preferential category of persons who had studied in Tamil medium,” the Bench observed.

It recorded the submission of Special Government Pleader V.R. Shanmuganathan that the government provided for 20 per cent concession in public recruitment for Tamil medium candidates and a G.O. issued on September 30, 2010 defined the term ‘persons studied in Tamil medium’ as those who had obtained the qualification required for direct recruitment through Tamil medium of instruction.

Subsequently, a Government Letter was sent to the TRB, Tamil Nadu Public Services Commission and the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board clarifying that the definition in the G.O. should be understood to mean that those applying for posts requiring a postgraduation degree should have pursued their Master’s degree through Tamil medium to claim the concession.

HC upholds sacking of court staff who gave fake documents

CHENNAI: Holding that a person employed in court should have absolute integrity, the Madras high court has confirmed dismissal of a court official for submitting fabricated records to secure promotion.

"Since the petitioner, M Sampath Kumar, is a person employed in the court, absolute integrity and devotion to duty is required. Production of a false or fabricated TNPSC bulletin before the judicial magistrate is a serious offence for which no leniency could be shown," said a division bench of Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice P R Shivakumar last week.

M Sampath Kumar joined service as a photocopyist at the court of principal district judge in Coimbatore about 14 years ago. As his further promotion depended on a departmental examination, he wrote the account test for subordinate officers on December 30, 2009. He later submitted a photocopy of a TNPSC bulletin bearing his name and registration number to the judicial magistrate-III in Coimbatore. The certificate, however, was not accepted as he failed to furnish the original hall ticket. He was reverted to his original post of 'examiner'. Sampath Kumar later cleared the test in 2013.

Disciplinary proceedings had already been initiated. He claimed he had obtained the earlier 'certificate' from his friends in the secretariat in Chennai. Not convinced, the principal district judge ordered his removal from service.

HC upholds selection of maritime university professors

CHENNAI: The Madras high court on Monday quashed the Centre's order cancelling of the selection of 31 professors for Indian Maritime University (IMU) in 2012-13, saying all the candidates were duly qualified and were chosen by a fair selection process, which included interviews over phone/Skype.

Justice M M Sundresh, describing the cancellation of their selection as bad in law, asked the IMU administration to offer them continuity of service and other benefits except back wages.

IMU advertised 63 posts of professors and associate/assistant professors in September 2012. After scrutinising applications and conducting interviews, 33 were selected. After the executive council approved their selection, two candidates declined to accept the offer. A total of 19 of them joined on or before March 31, 2013, which was the original date prescribed for joining. Other who got time to join duty had quit their jobs abroad and within the country to join the IMU.

Following allegations of irregularities in the recruitment, the Centre formed Captain Mohan Committee in February 2013 to go into the issue. On April 3, 2013, the committee gave a report recommending "review of the entire selection process". Admitting that it was only a preliminary exercise, the committee asked IMU to carry out a detailed study. However, the Centre chose to cancel the appointments en masse.

On Monday, coming to the rescue of selected candidates and finding nothing amiss in the selection process, Justice Sundresh said: "Qualification and eligibility were considered and taken note of both by the selection committee and executive council. It is not in dispute that all the 31 were selected after the interview. Such methodology is sought to be overturned in a sweeping manner by merely accepting the report of the Captain Mohan Committee which is devoid of material particulars, apart from not being binding."

Holding that the very constitution of the committee is improper, Justice Sundresh said its report has got no statutory prescription. "It has made general remarks here and there. It has not gone into the qualification and eligibility of the petitioners. The constitution of the committee and the reliance made on its report, which formed the basis of the impugned orders, is bad in law."

As for telephone interviews, the judge said there was neither any fraud nor procedural violation in the method. Rejecting phone or Skype interview could not be accepted, he said, "What is prescribed is only an interview, and therefore, in the absence of any malpractice involved therein, it cannot be said to be wrong. The procedure adopted is not barred expressly."

The judge then asked IMU to continue the services of those professors who are working as on date. As for those who were working and then not permitted to work following 'termination' orders, he said they should be given continuity of service from the date of the termination orders, apart from consequential benefits, except the back wages. In view of peculiar facts of the case, the judge said those who could not join duty too are entitled to count their service from the prescribed last date given by IMU to join duty for seniority, without any back wages.

High Court declares Subordinate Service Rule unconstitutional

In a major judgment, the Madras High Court has declared as unconstitutional a Tamil Nadu State Subordinate Service Rule which restricted recruitment for various posts only by calling for names of eligible candidates from employment exchanges.

A Division Bench comprising Justices N.Paul Vasanthakumar and P.R.Shivakumar directed the authorities to call for applications through advertisement as well as the list from employment exchanges, if it was required to be called for, and do the selection in public for both temporary and permanent posts.

The grievance of S.Vimalraj and four others was that they had passed Higher Secondary examination and underwent first year Diploma Course in Teacher Education in 1992-1993 in an institution in Pudukottai, enjoying temporary recognition. The recognition was set aside by the High Court along with a batch of cases in April 1993. Following this, nearly 28,000 teacher training students who underwent the course in those private teacher training institutes were affected.

The Tamil Nadu Government decided to give training to the affected students through government teacher training institutes in a phased manner. Later, the National Council for Teacher Education Act came into force in July 1995. The law prescribed uniform syllabus for teacher education throughout the country.

The appellants completed the two-year course in 2006-08. As selection for various posts was made based on seniority of registration in employment exchanges for the post of Secondary Grade Teachers, they said their rights had been affected.

They filed a writ petition challenging Rule 10 (A) (a) which restricted appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers only through employment exchanges.

Counsel argued that the rule was unconstitutional. On February 1, 2012, a single Judge dismissed the petition. Hence, the present appeal. The Bench said that considering the judgments of Supreme Court and the Madras High Court, it was of the view that the declaration sought for by the appellants deserved to be allowed.












The rules restricted recruitment for various posts only by calling for names from employment exchanges

Times of India... Chennai Edition

No such thing as `benefit of doubt' acquittal: Judge

A Subramani

Chennai:





A.Subramani@timesgroup.com Till he was denied appointment as a police constable at the eleventh hour earlier this year, E Kalivarathan was not aware of the difference between ‘acquittal’ and ‘honourable acquittal’ in a criminal case.He, along with seven others, was slapped with rioting charges by Pudupet police in Cuddalore district in 2010. In December 2012, a magistrate court acquitted him of all charges, as none of the 12 witnesses spoke against him, and the case was not supported by any document. The magistrate said he was acquitting Kalivarathan, by giving him the ‘benefit of doubt’. As no appeal was made, the case had attained finality.
This year, Kalivarathan was selected as grade II police constable. While he was eagerly awaiting his appointment orders, he was informed that his candidature has been rejected as police verification and antecedent check revealed that he was acquitted in a criminal case, but not honorably. That is, getting cleared of a criminal offence on the basis of benefit of doubt would not mean honorable acquittal, and hence a continuing stigma.
Convinced that he deserved a clear acquittal, so as to be considered for future employments, Kalivarathan then took the extraordinary step of moving the high court seeking conversion of his acquittal into an ‘honorable acquittal’.
Justice S Nagamuthu, discussing the issue threadbare, said that if there was no evidence at all against the accused, the criminal courts should not unnecessarily use expressions such as “not proved beyond reasonable doubt” or “accused is acquitted by giving benefit of doubt.” Noting that a court cannot use the expression “honorable acquittal” which is unknown to criminal law, Justice Nagamuthu said since no one has spoken anything incriminating against Kalivarathan, he should have been given an acquittal “without adding any adjectives such as ‘not proved beyond reasonable doubt’ or ‘by giving benefit of doubt’.” He then converted the order into one of acquittal, and added that it is for the appointing authority to study the order and take appropriate decision on his appointment.





16.07.2012 It is not permissible for the respondents to discriminate between similarly situated persons, on the ground of their having acquired qualification from different sources.

Madras High Court

J.Denis Winston vs The Academic Officer on 16 July, 2012

       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.07.2012

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA

W.P. No.5458 of 2012 &
M.P.No.1 of 2012




J.DENIS WINSTON                                  .. PETITIONER

-vs-

1. THE ACADEMIC OFFICER,
 THE TAMIL NADU DR.MGR MEDICAL UNIVERSITY,
 NO.69, ANNA SALAI, GUINDY
 CHENNAI-600 032.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION
 KILPAUK, CHENNAI-600 010.

3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
 HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (MCA1) DEPT.,
 SECRETARIAT, FORT ST. GEORGE,
 CHENNAI - 600 009.

4. THE DEAN 
 STANELY MEDICAL COLLEGE,
 CHENNAI-600 001.     ..  Respondents




Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned condition NON STIPENDIARY alone in Order No. Rc.No.ACI(1)/60556/2011 dated 23.01.2012 by the 1st Respondent and quash the condition NON STIPENDIARY alone and direct the respondents to pay stipend at the rate of Rs.7600/- per month to the petitioner every month with effect from the date on which the petitioner is undergoing CRRI training in Stanley Medical College  Chennai i.e., from 15.02.2012 till the completion of CRRI training on par with the interns of Stanley Medical College Chennai.




  For Petitioner  :    Mr.S.Joseph Selvaraj

  For R1  : Mrs.Narmada Sampath 

  For R2 to R4 : Mr.R.Vijayakumar
     Addl. Govt. Pleader


*****

O R D E R

The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned condition "non-stipendary" in Order No. Rc.No.ACI(1)/60556/2011 dated 23.01.2012, passed by the 1st respondent with consequential relief of issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay stipend at the rate of Rs.7,600/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Six Hundred only) per month with effect from the date on which the petitioner was enrolled as CRRI trainee at Stanley Medical College, Chennai, i.e., 15.02.2012 till completion of CRRI training at par with the interns of Stanley Medical College Chennai.

2. The petitioner successfully completed M.D.(Physician) course from Stavropol State Medical Academy, Russian Federation, Russia in June 2012. This academy is a Government Medical Academy, recognized by the Medical Council of India, and successfully passed the screening test held in September 2011 in the first attempt, conducted by the National Board of Examinations.

3. The petitioner, after being enrolled by the Medical Council of India, applied for no objection certificate for undergoing CRRI training. The request of petitioner was accepted and no objection certificate was issued by the respondent no.1, but by showing him as non-stipendary intern.

4. The father of petitioner filed an application under the Right to Information Act on 23.01.2012 for disclosing reasons for imposing the impugned condition of non-stipendary. Request was also made for supply of a copy of necessary guidelines / instructions, but no reply was received to the request made by the petitioner. The petitioner did not take further steps under the Right to Information Act for non supply of information asked for.

5. The petitioner has challenged the impugned condition imposed in the no objection certificate issued by the respondent no.1, on the ground that the impugned condition is unjustified, unreasonable, therefore, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

6. The impugned condition is also challenged, on the ground of it being discriminatory, as the petitioner is performing the same duties as performed by other interns, i.e. dealing with all types of emergencies, rendering basic care, assist in major medical and surgical procedures and performing the job of Medical Officer in peripheral areas and also bridge the communication gap between residents and paramedical staff etc.

7. It is also submitted, that in spite of payment of fee of Rs.63,000/- (Rupees Sixty Three Thousand only), respondent no.1 has not issued unconditional no objection certificate to the petitioner as done in the case of other interns, rather imposed the unreasonable condition of non-stipendary.

8. The Medical Council of India's guidelines do not bar the grant of stipend to Foreign Medical Graduates, undergoing CRRI training in the Government colleges in India.

9. The respondent no.1 in the counter filed has taken a stand, that since Stavropol State Medical Academy, Russian Federation, Russia is a Government medical academy duly recognized by the Medical Council of India, based on the representation of petitioner, no objection certificate has been issued as demanded. It is the stand of respondent no.1, that non-stipendary condition was imposed in view of the Government Order (Rt) No.107 issued by the Health and Family Welfare (MCA1) Department dated 08.02.2012. The reliance is also placed on G.O.(Ms).No.319, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 30.11.2001, stipulating collection of fee in lumpsum from students from the foreign countries.

10. It is also stated in the counter, that Government of India and Director of Medical Education, Chennai are authorities to pay stipend to CRRI students and not the University, therefore, the stand of University is that the impugned condition was imposed in compliance with the Government orders.

11. The third respondent has filed counter to take a stand that the Government took a generous view, and allowed the candidates of other States / Foreign Universities to do their internship in Government Medical Colleges, falling under the purview of Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University so as to enable them to enrich their clinical skills as a non-stipendary candidate.

12. The stand of the respondent no.3 is that the candidates of other Universities, do not have the skills of the standards of the students of Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University, and that the object of the training is to give abundant clinical knowledge for excellent, voluminous clinical material, excellent teaching facilities, so as to be at par with students, who have studied in the State of Tamil Nadu.

13. It is also pleaded, that the internship is mandatory and the Medical graduates cannot practice independently without completing internship. An artificial classification is sought to be drawn in the counter by submitting, that only meritorious students including economically weaker sections of the Society are admitted in the Government colleges, whereas various students from economically wealthy families , who do not secure good marks to compete with meritorious students of the State, undergo medical education in other States / Countries, therefore, they cannot be equated with the meritorious candidates admitted in the Medical College.

14. It is also submission of respondent no.3, that the petitioner along with eight others similarly situated persons have been allowed to do internship in Government Medical colleges as non-stipendary intern.

15. The submission, therefore is that the petitioner cannot allege discrimination, as he along with foreign universities and other States students forms separate class from that of interns, who have passed their MBBS from the Colleges affiliated to Dr.MGR Medical University.

16. On consideration, this Court finds, that the stand taken by the respondents cannot be accepted. Once the petitioner is qualified from the recognized college, though in the foreign country, and also passed examination conducted by the National Board of Examinations of the Medical Council of India, he has to be treated at par with other MBBS students.

17. The petitioner therefore, is having the same qualification as other Interns, who have done their MBBS from Dr.MGR University, specially when it is not disputed, that the petitioner as well as other interns are performing the same duties as CRRI trainees.

18. It is not permissible for the respondents to discriminate between similarly situated persons, on the ground of their having acquired qualification from different sources. The students from the Foreign Universities, who have cleared the examination, conducted by the National Board of Medical Examinations and students from other States undergoing internship, i.e. CRRI training forms one class, therefore, action of the respondents in discriminating similarly situated persons cannot be sustained, being violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

19. The Government orders, on which reliance has been placed are merely Government instructions, which do not have statutory force of law. It is not disputed, that the Medical Council of India does not categorize the foreign students, who have cleared examinations conducted by the Medical Board of Examinations of the Medical Council of India, to be different from the students, who have acquired their MBBS qualification from the State Universities as projected. The Government Orders on which the reliance is placed being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, deserve to be declared as unconstitutional.

20. The contention of learned counsel for the respondent no.1, that the students, who have studied in the foreign countries are not meritorious, can safely be said to be totally misconceived, as the persons passing out from foreign country are required to pass out the exams conducted by the National Board of Examinations to prove their knowledge and competence. Once persons clear that examinations, it cannot be said that student is incompetent, nor it is permissible in law to allow incompetent persons to undertake internship training and play with the life of patients. The argument raised is thus, argument in desperation, which deserves to be noticed to be rejected.

21. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned condition of "non-stipendary" in the order is quashed. A writ in the nature of VINOD K.SHARMA,J., vri/ar Mandamus is issued, directing the respondent nos.2 to 4 to pay stipend to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.7,600/- (Rupees Seven Thousand and Six Hundred only) per month with effect from 15.02.2012 and continue paying him the stipend till completion of CRRI training at Stanley Medical College Chennai.

22. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions is closed.

vri/ar To

1. THE ACADEMIC OFFICER, THE TAMIL NADU DR.MGR MEDICAL UNIVERSITY, NO.69, ANNA SALAI, GUINDY CHENNAI-600 032.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION KILPAUK, CHENNAI-600 010.

3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (MCA1) DEPT., SECRETARIAT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI - 600 009.

4. THE DEAN STANELY MEDICAL COLLEGE, CHENNAI 600 001