TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Department decided to admit candidates strictly on merit to be determined on academic achievements and results in written and viva voce tests for selection. A committee of experts was entrusted the task of selecting the candidates for admission. That Committee had accepted minimum 50% marks as the norm for selection. 3. In 1988-89, for six seats advertisement was issued and intending candidates applied. The respondent who hailed from outside the State applied in the quota reserved for such candidates. All the outside State candidates competed for the three seats reserved for them and appeared for the selection test. None of those who appeared met the minimum requirement. In order that the three seats may not go waste, the minimum marks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, an appeal FMAT No. 285 of 1992 was carried to the Division Bench. Thereafter, the writ petition was finally disposed of on 21-1-1992 holding that the refusal to grant admission was illegal and unjustified and directed that the candidate be admitted forthwith. Against the said mandate, an appeal FMAT No. 392 of 1992 was filed before the Division Bench. The appeal was admitted and stay granted. 5. During the pendency of the three appeals, the original writ petitioner moved for vacating the interim order on the plea that the Calcutta University had issued a notice dated 30-8-1993 inviting applications for admission to the three-year MD course in Ayurveda and he was likely to get admission if the interim order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -3-1995. It is an admitted fact that since the members of the Calcutta Bar were on strike, the counsel for both sides were absent and hence the Court passed the order after hearing the respondent. If the matter was urgent and the respondent who was present in person insisted on being heard and orders being passed on his application as his career was at stake, could the Court refuse to take up his application for hearing and refuse to pass an appropriate order on merits? The answer must obviously be in the negative because to do so would tantamount to the Court becoming privy to the strike. The court is under an obligation to hear and decide cases brought before it and cannot shirk that obligation on the ground that the advocates are on stri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nagement. If the averments of the respondent were correct and if he was in fact selected for admission, the most the Court should have stated was that the interim orders will not preclude the management from granting admission if the candidate had been selected for admission. That would have been the appropriate order to pass on the averment of the candidate that he had been selected for admission in the relevant academic year. The Court issued a directive to grant him tentative admission which was not correct. If the candidate was selected and the management found it difficult to grant him admission on account of the prevailing interim orders of the Court, the proper thing to do was to lift the stay and leave it to the management to grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
