'Merit Can Never Be Compromised': Bombay High Court Objects To 'Pick & Choose' Policy In Medical Fee Reimbursement Scheme
The Bombay High Court has strongly criticised the State authorities' “pick and choose” method while implementing a one-time scheme for reimbursement of fees to students who lost admission to Government or Aided medical colleges due to the application of EWS and SEBC reservation. The Court held that the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of the Government Resolution dated 20.09.2019 after finding that students with lower merit had been given the benefit of the reimbursement scheme while the petitioners were excluded.
A Division Bench of Justice Kishore C. Sant and Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar was hearing two writ petitions filed by medical students seeking reimbursement of fees under the Government Resolution dated 20.09.2019. The resolution provided for reimbursement of the fees paid in private medical colleges over and above the fee payable in Government medical colleges to students who lost the opportunity of admission to Government or Aided medical colleges due to the accommodation of EWS and SEBC students. The benefit of reimbursement of fees under the resolution was extended to students like the petitioners, yet the petitioners' names stood excluded from the list of beneficiaries.
The petitioners pointed out that certain students who were granted reimbursement stood lower in merit than them. The respondents, however, contended that the petitioners could not have secured admission in Government or Aided medical colleges even if there was no EWS or SEBC reservation and therefore there was no occasion to grant them reimbursement.
The Court observed that if the students standing at lower position on merit were offered benefit of the scheme, the Petitioner too was entitled for such benefit. The respondents relied upon the 70:30 quota system to explain the admission of students having lower ranks. Refuting the contention, the Court observed:
“We disapprove the justifications offered by the respondent authorities. Merit can never be compromised nor can be on second pedestal. If the Petitioner was on higher rank, he could not have been denied such admission.”
In the second writ petition also, the Court noted that the respondents were unable to dispute that the petitioners were entitled to relief, observing:
“The record produced by the respondent authorities is crystal clear demonstrating that the Petitioners were very much entitled for admission in government or aided medical college, and that they deprived of the opportunity. Consequently, the Petitioners deserve benefit of fees reimbursement.”
The Court also expressed its displeasure at the administration and conduct of medical admission, noting:
“… the admission process and implementation of fees reimbursement scheme utterly lacked of transparency and accuracy. The then admission authorities interfered with career of students for the reasons best known to them, and atleast on wrongful application of quota system.”
The Court also disapproved of the respondents' conduct throughout the proceedings.
“The delay on the part of the respondent authorities in assisting the Court, rather avoiding the original record from being produced before this Court do speak itself. We are of the considered view that the Petitioners deserve to be compensated by saddling exemplary cost on the respondent authorities,” the Court remarked.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the writ petitions and declared that the petitioners were entitled to reimbursement under the Government Resolution dated 20.09.2019. The respondents were directed to pay costs of ₹50,000 each to the petitioners.
The Court also directed the Principal Secretary of the Medical Education and Drugs Department, Government of Maharashtra, to conduct an enquiry into the issue and adopt suitable measures to avoid such incidents in future.
Case Title: Prajwal Tukaram Kasbekar v. The State of Maharashtra [Writ Petition No. 358 of 2021 along with Writ Petition No. 6715 of 2020]