![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Wednesday, Jul 25, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kerala |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs |
Kerala
Government asked not to publish list till July 27 High Court order on writ petitions
Kochi: The High Court on Tuesday directed the State Government not to publish the list of candidates allotted to the 57 per cent of seats given to the Government by the five self-financing medical colleges till July 27. Justice S. Siri Jagan issued the interim directive while reserving his orders on a batch of writ petitions challenging the Government order allotting 70 per cent of the 57 per cent Government quota in five self-financing medical colleges for filling on the basis of merit-cum-means basis. Petitioners’ contention
The petitioners contended that seats given by the self-financing colleges should be treated on a par with the general merit quota seats available in Government medical colleges. In fact, only candidates whose annual income was below Rs.2.50 lakh would be considered under the merit-cum-means category of seats. They contended that it would exceed the permissible reservation of 50 per cent. Some of the petitioners sought to quash the fee structure prescribed for the general merit quota in self-financing medical colleges as well. They contended that the students admitted to the Government quota in the self-financing colleges had to pay an annual tuition fee of Rs.20,000 in addition to the interest-free deposit. But the students admitted in the Government medical colleges need to pay only an annul tuition fee of Rs.12,500. They also contended that the Government order was illegal as the prospectus did not speak about the merit-cum-means reservation. Government claim
Advocate General C.P. Sudhakara Prasad submitted that the merit-cum-means reservation was introduced to help economically backward students. In fact, the seats were reserved for the poor students on the basis of the agreements reached between the managements and the Government. The agreement was entered after reaching a consensus on seat-sharing between the Government and the managements. It was the constitutional duty of the Government to provide an opportunity to poor students to pursue their studies. The Advocate General also pointed out that the prospectus originally published could be changed for including the conditions in the agreements. The prospectus published by the self-financing colleges had made it clear that prospectus would be subject to change.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
![]()
|
|
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
|