Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jul 20, 2007
ePaper
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, Jul 20, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs |
Tamil Nadu
J. Venkatesan
Stay opposed saying it would disturb the counselling process Admissions made in the first round will not be disturbed
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed a Madras High Court judgment, excluding those who were admitted to various professional courses last year from participating in this year’s medical counselling, in spite of their selection in the rank list for admissions. A three-Judge Bench, comprising Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice Dalveer Bhandari, however, said admissions made during the first round of counselling would not be disturbed. The prospectus issued for 2007-08 provided for candidates who were admitted to various professional courses (except medicine) last year to apply for this year’s medical courses. During the hearing of a batch of writ petitions challenging this provision, the State informed the court that it would not implement this clause. As a result, about 400 candidates, who were in the merit list for admission to medical courses, could not attend the counselling. “Take your chance”
When senior counsel L. Nageswara Rao, appearing for G.P. Anusha and seven other affected students, submitted that the affected students should be permitted to attend the second counselling scheduled for July 23, the Bench told him: “Take your chance in the second round of counselling. We cannot disturb the admissions already made in the first counselling.” Mr. Rao brought to the notice of the court that many students in private colleges had got back their Transfer Certificates by paying fees for the entire course. Having received the call letter they could not participate in the counselling in view of the July 10 High Court order. Counsel for the State V.G. Pragasam and P.R. Kovilan and counsel for the caveator, C. Maria Arul Rex, opposed the stay saying it would disturb the counselling process as the admissions had almost been completed. The Bench, staying the impugned judgment, told counsel: “Everybody has got a right to get admission in a government medical college. For some reason they might have joined a private medical college last year. How can you deny their right? There is huge disparity in the fees in government medical college and private medical college. Can you deprive their chances of admission in a government college?”
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
