HC Dismisses Student's Plea to Continue Medical Course
Noting that the purpose of NEET is to ensure only meritorious students get allotted seats, the Madras High Court has said mere vacancy of seats cannot be a ground for a candidate securing lesser marks to get admission in medical courses.
Chennai, Aug 18 (PTI) Noting that the purpose of NEET is to ensure only meritorious students get allotted seats, the Madras High Court has said mere vacancy of seats cannot be a ground for a candidate securing lesser marks to get admission in medical courses.
"If this is allowed, every college will start admitting the students under some pretext or the other, thereby defeating the purpose of National Eligibility-cum-Entrance test and the directions of the Supreme Court," Justice S Vaidyanathan said.
The judge stated this while dismissing a plea of M R Unnamalai, who wanted the authorities concerned to allow her to complete the BDS course in RVS Dental College and Hospital, Coimbatore.
The petitioner said she got admission to the college in August 2017, but the Tamil Nadu MGR University informed the college that she had not got the eligibility mark of 131 for an unreserved candidate, as she had obtained 107 marks.
Therefore, the university said, she was not eligible for the course under the unreserved category.
But the college said it was a private self-financing institution, where the annual intake for BDS course was 100, of which 65 per cent were allotted as the government quota and the remaining 35 per cent as the management quota.
For the 2017-18 academic year, the government had forwarded only 60 candidates under its quota for 65 seats and the remaining five seats fell vacant.
Under the management quota, the selection committee had sent only nine candidates out of 35.
As per the usual procedure, the college said it would wait till the last date for admission to fill up the seats sent by the committee and that if there were no further candidates, the college itself would fill the seats.
Taking note of the vacant seats and that the petitioner has completed the first year, the college said she should be permitted to pursue the course and that the institution was willing to abide by the order of the court.
(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)