Madras HC Comes To The Rescue Of 16 YO Child Prodigy With Medical Dreams [Read Order]

Madras HC Comes To The Rescue Of 16 YO Child Prodigy With Medical Dreams [Read Order]

The Madras High Court has ordered the Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy to permit a 16-year-old student to take part in the counselling for the B.A.M.S course.

Justice T Raja ordered that she be admitted in Maria Ayurveda Medical College in Kanyakumari district, if she is found eligible through the counselling.

The court was hearing a petition filed on behalf of the student, Yazhesy Tha, who had scored 157.25, but had not found a place on the merit list, despite the fact that the list contained names of students with scores ranging between 100 and 198.

She had now challenged Clause-3 of the Prospectus issued by the Director, Indian Medicine and Homeopathy Department for admissions to BSMS/BAMS/BNYS/BUMS/BHMS courses for the year 2018-2019 as unconstitutional. This clause required applicants to have completed 17 years of age on December 31, 2018.

Further, she had demanded that her name then be directed to be included in the General Merit List for UG courses in Indian Medicine and Homeopathy, 2018-2019, as published by the respondent authorities.

Supporting her plea, Amicus curiae Senior Counsel R. Thiagarjan had pointed out that the petitioner is a meritorious student, who had recited 1330 thirukurals while studying in L.K.G. itself and that she has since been awarded with several certificates and awards.

He also drew the court’s attention to an amendment notification passed in November, 2016, laying down the eligibility criteria for admissions to B.S.M.S/B.A.M.S/B.N.Y.S/B.U.M.S., courses. This notification did not prescribe any cut-off age limit for applying for these courses.

The court, therefore, allowed her plea, and directed the authorities to permit her to participate in the counselling process, observing, “When the petitioner has admittedly complied with the aforementioned admission qualifications, as per the amendment notification dated 07.11.2016, the respondents cannot rely upon the old notification dated 13.10.2006 issued for Siddha by citing the age factor that she has not completed 17 years of age as on 31.12.2018. 

This Court finds no impediment on the basis of the latest amended notification to allow the petitioner to take part in the counselling.”

Read the Order Here