1

W.P.No.20254/2011

People's University & others Union of India & others

25.4.2012

Shri A.P.Shroti, Counsel for petitioners. Shri Mohan Sausarkar, Counsel for Union of India. Smt.Indira Nair, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri Rajas Pohankar, Counsel for Medical Council of India. Shri Naman Nagrath, Additional Advocate General for State of M.P.

I.A.No.5108/2012

By this application, respondents No.3 & 4 are seeking directions against the petitioners for not to fill up all post-graduate seats by the Institution itself and are making a prayer for issuance of a direction against the petitioners to comply with the order dated 27.5.2009 by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.4060/09 which is still in vogue. It is submitted that the petitioners may be directed to comply with the directions issued by the Apex Court, which are as follows:-

"We, therefore, direct that the admissions in the private unaided medical/dental colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh will be done by first excluding 15% N.R.I. seats (which can be filled up by the private institutions as per para 131 of Inamdar's case), and allotting half of the 85% seats for admission to the under-graduate and post-graduate courses to be filled in by an open competitive examination by the State Government, and the remaining half by the Association of the Private Medical and Dental College. Both the State Government as well as the Association of Private Medical and Dental Colleges will hold their own separate entrance examination for this purpose. As regards the 'NRI Seats', they will be filled as provided under the Act and Rules, in the manner they were done earlier."

Shri Nagrath, learned Additional Advocate General also submitted that at present, prayer of respondents No.3 & 4 is for restraining the petitioners for filling up post-graduate seats by the institution itself.

2

W.P.No.20254/2011

People's University & others Union of India & others

25.4.2012

Shri Shroti, learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that so far as ensuing admissions of post-graduate seats are concerned, petitioners are ready to comply with the directions issued by the Apex Court dated 27.5.2009 (supra) without prejudice to their right to address on the merits of the case. It was also submitted that the matter may be heard at an earlier date. Considering the fact that petitioner institution itself has come forward to comply with the order dated 27.5.2009 (supra) for the ensuing admission of post-graduate seats, subject to decision of this petition, no further directions are necessary in the matter. Aforesaid statement is taken on record.

So far as hearing of matter is concerned, it was submitted by the parties that students have also filed various petitions before this Court which are the connected matters and they may be heard alongwith this matter also. To this, Shri Shroti has no objection. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that students who have also filed various petitions before this Court and the aforesaid petitions are listed for analogous hearing with this petition are permitted to address in this petition also. Petitioners to serve a copy of this petition to all the petitioners in the connected matters. The students, if are willing to file any pleading in this case, are permitted to do so, but within a period of two weeks from today.

Considering the urgency in the matter, we direct that this case be listed for hearing on 10.5.2012.

C.C. as per rules.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (M.A.Siddiqui) Judge Judge

C.