Malpractice In Counselling For Medical Admissions: Madras HC Seeks Response As To Why CBI Enquiry Should Not Be Conducted

The court was hearing an appeal filed by Dr G. Selvarajan, former secretary of the Selection Committee, Directorate of Medical Education, seeking a stay of a single bench order whereby the court had found Selvarajan along with others guilty of not conducting the mop-up counselling for the management seats. The court had also found that Sekvarajan and the other respondents in the writ petition were giving the seats to non-meritorious students to the exclusion of meritorious students. Thus, the court had ordered an enquiry against Dr Selvarajan and others and had issued directions to stop pension and other benefits payable to the individuals, subject to the outcome of the investigation.

When the matter came up before the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy, the court sought response from the state government as to what action had been taken pursuant to the order of the single bench. The court also sought a response as to whether an FIR was registered and whether the Chief Secretary had taken actions to initiate enquiry against the appellant.

The court also wondered about the circumstances in which a government order was issued to ratify the period of two months when order for extension of service of the writ appellant was not existing.

Background

Students who had qualified for the NEET examinations had approached the High Court of Madras seeking directions to the authorities- The Director of General Health Services, the Director of the Directorate of Medical Education and the secretary of the selection committee, to conduct mop-up counselling for the management seats and to fill up the Post Graduate Medical seats declared as vacant as per the seat matrix.

While allowing the petitions, the single bench had observed the following:

"The act of not conducting mop up counseling inspite of the mandate of the Medical Council of India and the approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is nothing but an act of ridiculing the statutory authority and the Constitutional authority that whatever the respondents behold, the respondents would go to any extent to dilute the mandate and the order to fulfill their objectives unmindful of the fact that the infraction committed by them not only borders on contempt, but it is also playing with the lives and livelihood of the younger generation."

The respondents had however contended that there was no illegality and that the mop-up counselling was not done only due to non-paucity of time. The respondents stated that due to the unprecedented Covid situation in the country, there was a delay in conducting the mop-up counselling of even the government quota.

The court however did not agree with the contentions of the respondents and was satisfied that an enquiry is to be conducted with respect to the respondents. The court also opined that even though the respondent Selvarajan, the appellant herein had since retired the court cannot avoid the fact that it was under his authority and direction that the illegal acts were done. It was also held that the illegal, unreasonable, arbitrary and perverse acts of the appellant herein has impeded on the lives of many aspiring candidates who have lost their valuable right of getting a seat in the higher medical course.

The court had thus directed the enquiry officer to register a case against Dr. Selvarajan and all the other persons involved in the scam. The enquiry officer was also directed to conduct enquiry against all persons in the Directorate of Medical Education and the Department under which the said Directorate is functioning so that none of the persons who had a foothold in the department are left out.

The court had also directed the Director General of Police not to transfer the officers involved in the investigations so that they could discharge their duties effectively. Further, the state was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 to the petitioners within a period of four weeks for the hardships caused to them.

Appeal Before the Division Bench

When the matter came up before the division bench, the appellant contended that during the course of proceedings the single judge had directed the CBCID police to conduct an investigation pertaining to the conduct of counselling for filling in post graduation medical college seats and to file reports before the court in sealed covers.

It was submitted that the single judge had passed orders only on considering the reports submitted in sealed covers by the CBCID and had not even made the appellant party to the proceedings. The appellant herein was not even given a copy of these reports nor was he given a chance to reply or defend himself.

The appellant also contended that the single judge while passing orders has enlarged the scope of the writ petition and has gone on to issue a slew of directions purely based on the report filed by the CBCID in a sealed cover without taking into consideration the procedure, prospectus, MCI Regulation 2000 and the disruption of the timeline caused in admissions due to covid.

Mr. Vignesh Venkat represented the appellant and Mr. G Murugendran appeared for the writ petitioner/non appellant No.1 while the respondent authorities were represented by State Government Pleader

The matter has been posted to 21.04.2022 for further hearing.

Case Title: Dr. G. Selvarajan v. Dr. M.S Santhosh and Ors

Case No: W.A No. 1093 of 2022

Click here to read/download Order