PUDICHERRY NEWS

 

NO NEED OF COURT NOD TO RENEW PASSPORT

 

MBBS

MBBS education will start in Gandhi Medical College in Hindi medium: CM

Thursday, 25 August 2022 | Staff Reporter | bhopal

Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan has said that from the session 2022-23, MBBS first year education will be imparted in Gandhi Medical College Bhopal through Hindi medium.

From July 2022, arrangements have been made to start BTech courses in 6 engineering colleges and diploma courses in 6 polytechnic colleges of the state through our mother tongue Hindi.

The National Policy on Education lays special emphasis on study and teaching in the mother tongue. Effective initiatives have been taken in this direction in the state. Chief Minister Chouhan gave this information by taking part in the Education Summit-2022 organized by a newspaper group in New Delhi virtually from the residence office.

Chief Minister Chouhan said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has described the 5 Cs of Critical Thinking, Creativity, Collaboration, Curiosity and Communication as important for better education. Work is being done on all these in the field of education in the state. Prime Minister Modi has taken a visionary initiative by gifting new education policy to the country. The new policy is a confluence of knowledge, skills and values ??in the true sense. The importance of knowledge has been included in 5 forms in the new education policy. This includes handing over Indian knowledge and philosophy to the new generations through education, concept based education system and freeing education from number game and cut-throat competition and converting it into grading and healthy competition. At the same time, promotion of research and research and making education multidimensional is also an important part of the new education policy.

Chief Minister Chouhan said that effective work is going on to link education with skill development and employment in the state. A Global Skill Park is being set up in Bhopal for international level skill education. Ten divisional ITIs in the state are being developed as ideal ITIs. A new startup policy has been implemented in the state.

Chief Minister Chouhan said that it is necessary to inculcate discipline, hard work, patriotism and respect for women in the students. Biographies of great men, stories of immortal martyrs and moral education have been included in the curriculum of schools and colleges. It is our endeavor to ensure that three percent of the total students studying in the state should participate in the National Cadet Corps. For this work is being started in the state.

Chief Minister Chouhan said we are also making efforts to ensure that no talented student should get frustrated due to paucity of money. Giving information about the ‘Mukhya Mantri Medhavi Vidyarthi Protsahan Scheme' and ‘Mukhya Mantri Chhatra Griha Scheme', Chief Minister Chouhan said that CM Rise School started in the state would usher in a revolution in the field of education.

NALGONDA

 

TRAIN INFO

 

CHENNAI POST RAINS

 

MBBS

 

MOTCHAM

 

FLIGHT INFO

 

DOCTOR NEUROSURGEON

 

BRAVERY

 

INDIA OVERTAKES UK

 

SPORTS

 

 

EDUCATION , IGNOU

 

MONKEYPOX

 

 

TTD FAILS TO PROVIDE SEVA TOLD TO PAY RS. 50 L

 

64-year-old Odisha man set to join MBBS after clearing NEET

64-year-old Odisha man set to join MBBS after clearing NEET

Satyasundar Barik

BHUBANESWAR

DECEMBER 25, 2020 19:49 IST

Jay Kishore Pradhan

The retired banker will be fulfilling the ambition he has been nurturing for decades

After 40 years of gruelling job and raising children, a sexagenarian is probably more inclined to spend times with grandchildren, play cards, get immersed in gardening or visit close relatives more frequently than before. However, a 64-year-old retired banker from Odisha has a different idea.

It may sound weird, but Jay Kishore Pradhan, born in 1956, has set out to become a doctor. He will formally start pursuing the four-year MBBS programme at the Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (VIMSAR), Burla, one of Odisha’s premier government-run health institutes, after taking admission on Monday.

Hailing from Atabira in Odisha’s Bargarh district, Mr. Pradhan has completed all formalities required for a new entrant to the MBBS programme. The senior citizen has been cleared of cardiology, pulmonary function and nephrology tests and allowed to study medicine.

Strange decision

He had retired as deputy manager in State Bank of India in 2016. The strange decision has surprised many, but Mr. Pradhan would actually be fulfilling the ambition he has been nurturing for decades.

“I had once appeared for the MBBS entrance examination just after my intermediate class in 1970s. I could not succeed then. I did not want to lose another year in preparation, so I joined B.Sc with Physics honours. Since then a sense of non-fulfilment keeps haunting me,” said Mr. Pradhan.

“Besides, I am indebted to medical science. My father was admitted to the college, where I would be studying, in 1982 for urinal ulcer. In 1987, he had undergone second surgery and was taken to Vellore for further treatment. As a result of successful treatment, my father survived till January 2010,” he narrated.

Strong desire

“The desire to study medicine was so strong that I was toying with the idea of taking voluntary retirement after 15 years of banking service. However, it was too risky to quit job keeping the family obligation in mind,” said Mr. Pradhan.

Subsequent to completion of graduation, he had joined as a part-time teacher in a local school before switching his job to telecom sector. Subsequently, he worked in Indian Bank. In 1983, Mr. Pradhan joined the SBI.

After staying away from active studies for four decades, how did the man find rhythm in preparation for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), which is fairly a tough test to crack even for student of this generation?

Motivation from daughters

“I have twin daughters, who were preparing for medical entrance examinations. I had been assisting them in their preparation. As I was very good at memorising physics, chemistry and biology, my daughters motivated me to give it a try,” said the sexagenarian.

“In 2019, the Supreme Court had lifted the upper age limit for studying till further judgment. It helped me firm up my resolve to pursue my dream. I took it as a challenge to study MBBS,” said Mr. Pradhan. The man had secured rank 5,94,380 by scoring 175. Mr. Pradhan became eligible to take admission in VIMSAR in physically handicapped quota.

Since one of his daughters had unfortunate demise last month, the family could not rejoice the achievement the way it should have been celebrated. “I am determined to continue study medicine in memory of my daughter,” he said.

Mr. Pradhan would turn 69 when he would complete the MBBS programme. Asked whether he is keen to join any regular job as a doctor after studies, he said, “I have already passed the phase of joining any regular job. Whatever I would learn would during next five years, I would keep practising privately in rest of my life,” he said.

No age limit

At VIMSAR, Brajamohan Mishra, Dean and Principal, who would be age wise one-year senior to Mr. Pradhan, is at loss of words after coming across the unheard of feat. “As per Supreme Court order, there is no age limit to pursue studies. He has been declared medically fit. As a signature of notary was missing on certain document, he has been asked to furnish it on Monday and join the course,” said Dr. Mishra.

“I would consider him my classmate and it would be a new kind of experience for me. Our brains are matured. Given his passion for studying medicine, I hope he does not face any problem in following scientific subjects in MBBS programme,” said the VIMSAR Principal.

MBBS : Kerala High Court Admits Plea Challenging NMC Rule Limiting Number Of Attempts To Clear Exam, Protects Students From Coercive Action

MBBS : Kerala High Court Admits Plea Challenging NMC Rule Limiting Number Of Attempts To Clear Exam, Protects Students From Coercive Action

Navya Benny

3 Sept 2022 10:45 AM

The Kerala High Court on Friday admitted a petition filed by a group of students pursuing MBBS course in various colleges under the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), challenging the amendment to the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education,1997 by the National Medical Commission

The Amendment notified on 04.11.2019 had restricted the maximum number of attempts to clear the first Professional University examination to four. The petitioners contended that as per the earlier guidelines of the Medical Commission of India ( replaced by NMC from 2019), the course could be completed within 10 years.

Justice Devan Ramachandran ordered that no coercive action ought to be taken against the medical students, while noting that the matter was one of importance which deserves to be admitted.

In the petition moved through Advocates M.R. Abhilash, Sreepriya A., and Vishal Ajayan V., the petitioners averred that they had secured admission to the various colleges through the National Eligibility and Entrance (NEET) Test during the academic year 2019 - 20. Their courses had begun on 8th August, 2019 onwards. It was during this time that the COVID-19 pandemic hit, and the nation went into lockdown. Subsequently, pursuant to State government notification, the students resumed their classes through virtual mode. It was averred by the petitioners that they faced various difficulties during this period due to some of them hailing from areas such as Wayanad where there were network connectivity issues, and some facing health problems. It was submitted that the students were also under extreme stress due to the vast syllabus of the MBBS Course, and the online tutorials were also frequently disrupted.

It was at this juncture that the KUHS announced the 1st year university examination for the 2019-2020 academic year students. It was averred by the petitioners that as per the guidelines, candidates ought to obtain minimum 50% marks separately for University theory examination in each subject, and not less than 40% marks in theory and practical separately assigned for internal assessment in a particular subject in order to be eligible for appearing at the final University examination of that subject. The students passing the examination in three subjects during first annual year are eligible for promotion to second year. Pursuant to the same, on 15th March 2021, the examinations for the subjects of Anatomy/ Physiology & Biochemistry were conducted, and once it was over, the students were allowed to join in the 2nd year class for the period of four months. However, on 19.07.2021 the result of the examination was published, and the petitioners were seen as having not secured the minimum mark of 50% as mandate by the university, In fact, most of them had lost their subjects by 3 or 4 marks.

It was averred that the SAY examinations were conducted by KUHS on 16th August 2021, for the students who failed to clear three subjects in 1st annual year exams, without giving adequate time to the students to revise the failed subjects, as a result of which they couldn't clear it. The supplementary examinations which were conducted subsequently also did not yield a favourable outcome for the students. It was in this context that the KUHS issued the impugned notification on 22nd July 2022, stating that the amended Regulations would be applicable to batches admitted in MBBS courses academic year 2019-2020, which also changed the pattern of examination.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the instant petition.

It was further averred by the petitioners that as the MCI had been replaced by the National Medical Commission (NMC) on 8th August 2019, any amendment subsequent to the repeal of the MCI Act would be unconstitutional, and further added that in any case, since the petitioners got admission before the amendment, the same ought not to be applicable to them. It was further averred that the University ought to have extended a lenient treatment to petitioners taking note of the fact that the conferment of up to 5 marks as grace mark in an individual paper instead of adding the same to the total marks would have enabled the petitioners to clear the exam.

Hence, the plea prayed that the the petitioners' right to attempt forthcoming examination to be conducted by the University ought to be recognized, and the Court may issue suitable directions to allow them to appear in the said examination, and not let this right be taken away by the impugned amendment. It was also prayed by the petitioners that the amendment would be declared as unconstitutional and violative of Article and set aside.

The respondents in the instant case are represented by the Standing Counsel for KUHS, Advocate P. Sreekumar, Advocate Titus Mani Vettam, the Assistant Solicitor General of India, S. Manu, and the Government Pleader.

The matter has been listed for 6th October 2022, until which time the status quo as regards the petitioners was ordered to be maintained.

Case Title: Amal Nasim M. & Ors. v. Kerala University of Health Science & Ors.

CHENNAI HOSTS SAME SEX MARRIAGE

 

MISCONDUCT

 

LUCKNOW NEWS

 

TREE FELLED

 

HYDERABAD NEWS

 

OTHER STATES

 

FM BLASTS

 

RETURN TO RGUHS

 

Ahmedabad news

 

CENTRAL STAFF

 

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE

 

GUV RETURNS SIDHA MEDICAL UNIERSITY BILL

 

CRIME

 

FLIGHT INFO

 

TN POLITICS

 

DOCTORS

 

CHALLENGES

 

TN POLITICS

 

MATERNITY LEAVE

 

B.Ed. Not "Bachelor Degree" Of Graduation: Gujarat High Court

2.9.2022

The Gujarat High Court has held that a B.Ed. Degree, i.e., Bachelor of Education, is not a Bachelor Degree of graduation since the said course, like 3-yrs-LLB course, can be perused only after one has graduated in any of the branches of arts or science.

In the same breath, the Court held that persons possessing a B.Ed. degree are over-qualified for positions having minimum prescribed qualification of Graduation and thus, rejection of their candidature for having more qualifications cannot be held to be bad in law.

The Court while relying on Chief Manger, Punjab National Bank & Anr. v. Anit Kumar Das thus concluded that the Petitioner-candidates were rightly not considered for the posts of Assistant Security Inspector, Traffic Inspector and Store Keeper, since they were over-qualified.

"Petitioners are having higher qualification than the minimum prescribed qualification as per the advertisement and there is no provision or rule which prescribes that the higher qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the post."

Two of the Petitioners were holding a B.Ed. degree but this was deemed not equivalent to the Bachelor's degree required for the posts. Another Petitioner's candidature was rejected basis wrong calculation of CGPA. Finally, one of the Petitioner was rejected on the ground that he was having a higher qualification than the minimum qualification.

The Petitioners submitted that the degree of B.Ed. was equivalent to the Graduate degree and it could not be termed as a Post Graduate Degree. They also submitted that the words 'Graduate' and 'Bachelor' were synonymous as per dictionaries which implied a person with a first University degree. Therefore, they were eligible candidates for the post.

However, this was opposed by the Respondent Corporation by stating that B.Ed. is not a Graduation course and it is offered for those interested in teaching only after achieving BA or BSc. The Respondent also insisted that it is for the employer to determine the relevancy and suitability of the qualifications of the post, keeping in view the institution and its requirements.

Affirming that for B.Ed. one has to possess a Bachelors in Arts or Science, the High Court explained that it cannot be considered a Bachelor Degree of Graduation as such. In also noted that in Anit Kumar Das, the Apex Court had not considered a person possessing higher qualification as eligible for the post of peon. In this light, Justice Karia reiterated:

"Exigencies of administration, it is trite law, fall within the domain of administrative decision making. The State as a public employer may well take into account social perspectives that require the creation of job opportunities across the societal structure. All these are essentially matters of policy. Judicial review must tread warily."

Case No.: C/SCA/16694/2017

Case Title: BRIJESHKUMAR DASHARATHLAL PATEL v/s CHAIRMAN & 31 others

Maternity Act' Doesn't Provide For Time Difference Between 1st & 2nd Child For Grant Of Maternity Benefits: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Woman

Sparsh Upadhyay

 2 Sept 2022 11:12 AM

 The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 Act does not contain any such stipulation regarding the time difference between the first and second child for the grant of maternity benefits. A

With this, the Court granted relief to an Inter College lecturer whose application for maternity leave had been rejected by placing reliance on Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook by contending that the same contains a restriction that the second maternity leave cannot be granted where there is a difference of less than two years between the end of the first maternity leave and grant of second maternity leave.

The case in brief

Essentially, her maternity leave application had been rejected on the ground that she had previously availed maternity leave which ended on May 18, 2018, which was a period less than 2 years, and hence, she was not entitled to the maternity leave as per Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook.

Before the Court, she argued that she had applied for maternity leave for a period of 174 days from November 26, 2017, to May 18, 2018, which was duly sanctioned and the petitioner gave birth to a baby boy on January 29, 2018, but unfortunately, the newborn child passed away due to cardiorespiratory just a day after his birth.

The petitioner again conceived for the second time and applied for maternity leave for a period of 24 weeks from November 18, 2018 to May 16, 2019, which had been rejected by means of the impugned order.

It was argued by her counsel that Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook runs contrary to the mandatory provisions of the 1961 Act, which doesn't stipulate any mandatory lapse of time between the first and second child so as to become eligible for the grant of maternity benefit.

In view of this, considering the provisions of Section 27 of the 1961 Act, the Counsel contended, that Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook Vol. II to IX would have to be read down and it is the provisions of the 1961 Act that would prevail.

On the other hand, the Counsel for the state argued that the impugned order is in conformity with the provisions of Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook Volume II to IV where a restriction has been placed for grant of maternity benefits prior to 2 years having lapsed from the date of expiry of the last maternity leave granted under the Rule.

Court's observations

At the outset, the bench of Justice Alok Mathur observed that a perusal of the provisions of the 1961 Act indicate that a woman would be entitled to give notice in writing for grant of maternity benefit, and on receipt of the notice, the employer shall permit such a woman to absent herself from the establishment during the period for which she receives the maternity benefit.

"The 1961 Act does not contain any such stipulation of the time difference between the grant of maternity benefit for the first and second child as stipulated in Rule 153 (1) of the Financial Handbook," the Court observed as it stressed that the 1961 Act does not contain any such stipulation.

Accordingly, the Court held that the respondents patently erred in placing reliance on Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook in rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of maternity leave.

"The Maternity Benefit Act 1961 has been enacted by the Parliament on a subject which finds mention in entry 24 of list III, and it was totally within its competence to make such an enactment. Even if the state legislature were to make such a law, overriding the provisions contained in the Maternity Benefit Act then the said act would be reserved for accent of the President and would be enforceable only after obtaining such an accent as provided in article 254(2) of the Constitution of India," the Court remarked.

Consequently, the Court held that once the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 has been adopted by the State of U.P. then the said Act of 1961 would apply with full force irrespective of the provisions contained in the Financial Handbook which is merely an executive instruction and would, in any case, be subsidiary to the legislation made by the Parliament.

"The provision of Financial Handbook are preConstitutional executive instructions and would be subsidiary to the Act of Parliament and in case of any inconsistency, the statutoy enactment framed by the Parliament would prevail and hence the provisions of Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 would prevail over the provisions of Financial Handbook and, therefore, provision of Rule 153 (1) of the Financial Handbook Volume I to IV are read down with regard to admissibility of leave to a woman with regard to second pregnancy which would be governed by Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 and not Rule 153 (1) of the Financila Handbook Volume II to IV," the Court held as it the writ petition is allowed and the respondents were directed to grant maternity benefit to the petitioner in terms of the Maternity Benefit Act 1961.

Case title - Satakshi Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Dept. Lucknow And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 5114 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 410

 

BAR COUNCIL

 

SPICE JET

 

UGC

 

TN RAIN FALL

 

NEW REGISTRAR