Chandigarh: GMCH-32 to fill UT pool seats based on NEET-PG merit despite exceeding all-India quota
The PG medical courses seats are divided into state and all-India quota. Earlier, in Chandigarh, the state quota pool was further divided into institutional preference and residence/domicile based. However, on January 29, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court (SC) had ruled that the domicile quota for admission to PG courses at GMCH-32 is not allowed.
On April 9, based on the apex court's judgement, the UT administration had issued a notice to convert the UT Chandigarh pool seats of the state quota into institutional preference for the third counselling round of admissions to the PG courses. Some students had then approached the high court (HC) against the UT administration's notice and for sharing grievances due to other reasons. The HC had dismissed the pleas in its order on May 27 and directed the UT administration to carry out admissions in accordance with the SC's judgement of January 29 and decisions of the HC division bench on April 23, 2019.
Following the HC's order on May 27, the UT administration had again notified about the third counselling round on June 3, stating that filling of the UT pool seats of the state quota will be held on all-India merit basis of NEET - PG. This notice has been challenged by a parent in the HC for exceeding the all-India quota limit. The hearing for the case is scheduled for Tuesday.
Regarding the June 3 notice, GMCH-32 stated that the third counselling round for the remaining state quota seats will be held on the basis of institutional preference and rank obtained in NEET - PG. Parents are opposing this decision, stating that withhalf of the state quota seats being filled through all-India merit basis, the all-India quota would go up to 75%, exceeding the 50% limit demarcated for it.
While some parents, whose wards are enrolled in medical courses outside Chandigarh, are favouring the decision, the other group, whose wards are studying at GMCH, is favouring institutional preference. The UT administration has been unable to keep its stance stable regarding the admission. A parent who has filed a petition against the notice released recently by the administration termed it arbitrary and said it to be favouring applicants seeking admission through the all-India quota. Health secretary Ajay Chagti said, 'We are going to go ahead with the third counselling as per our June 3 notice that is based on HC's judgement which was upheld by the SC in January. In our clarification plea regarding the remaining seats under the state quota, the SC had directed us in March to go ahead as per the HC's judgment. In the HC's decision on May 27, same directions were issued.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
India's ambassador to Cuba ends up with 2 wives, SC seeks solution
NEW DELHI: Can a marriage solemnised between a man and a woman belonging to the Kuki tribe in a church be dissolved by the Songpijan village committee and 'gaonburas (village elders)' in Assam's Dima Hasao district on proceedings initiated by the husband relying on customary law? The Gauhati HC had said once a marriage takes place in a church in terms with the Christian Marriage Act, 1872, it cannot be annulled by customary law practices involving village elders. Such a marriage can only be dissolved through proceedings initiated before the HC or the district judge as per section 10 of the Divorce Act, 1869, it had said. This HC ruling landed the Indian ambassador to Cuba, Thongkomang Armstrong Changsan, in a piquant matrimonial situation as he ended up with two wives. Prior to the HC declaring in 2022 that his 1994 church marriage with Neikhol Changsan subsisted, he had married another woman after the customary divorce. From both marriages, he has a daughter each. SC says it has no sympathy for Cuba envoy After failure of the mediation ordered by the Supreme Court, during pendency of Changsan's appeal, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi on Friday orally observed that the HC judgment is legally sound. Finding that the Indian Foreign Service officer is now married for nearly a decade and half, it decided to find a solution to this legal-matrimonial complexity and help the first wife start a new life. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The ambassador said he has been paying a monthly maintenance of Rs 20,000 to Neikhol and has given her a house in Delhi. Neikhol argued the case herself and told the court that she had single handedly brought up her daughter without any participation from her husband. He manipulatively estranged her from daughter, says 1st wife Neikhol, the first wife, alleged that he has now manipulatively estranged her daughter (29) from her. For the ambassador, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy said the father had been meeting the expenses of his daughter, who is pursuing a career in Bengaluru. Neikhol appealed to SC to "protect her honour and dignity" while describing how surreptitiously Changsan dissolved the marriage using tribal community elders, and remarried. The Justice Kant-led bench said, "We have absolutely no sympathy for the man. The HC judgment is in your favour, and you have suffered socially and mentally. But can you think of a way to start life afresh?" Interestingly, 'Kuki Inpi' of Assam, the highest governing body of the Kuki tribe in the state, has said Kuki customary law can neither dissolve a Christian marriage performed in church nor can it force any couple to reunite against the will of the couple. SC said it could be profitable for Neikhol to meet her daughter and discuss future course of action, and asked the ambassador to arrange for her flight tickets to Bengaluru, a place of stay near her daughter's place, and pay her an ad hoc amount of Rs 3 lakh to enable her to meet her daughter. "If at all there is a possibility of settlement, the daughter could have a significant role to play," Justice Kant said, adding that the IFS officer must advise his daughter to re-establish contact with her mother.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Judge Varma hides identity, is ‘XXX' in his SC petition
Judge Varma hides identity, is 'XXX' in his SC petition NEW DELHI: Facing removal motion in Parliament for sacks of cash found at his official residence in Delhi, Justice Yashwant Varma has kept his identity a secret in his petition in the Supreme Court while seeking quashing of the in-house inquiry report and then CJI's recommendation for stripping him of judgeship. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih is scheduled to hear his petition on Monday. In the petition, his name is described as "XXX". Such camouflage is used in records of SC and HCs to hide the identity of petitioner women who were sexually harassed or assaulted. It is also used to prevent revealing the identity of juveniles, and minors in matrimonial custody battles. SC has in many judgments asked all courts not to reveal the names of rape survivors in judgments. LS Speaker may write to CJI this week for panel members' names Justice Varma's plea - titled "XXX vs Union of India" - is the 699th civil writ petition filed in SC this year. While the Centre is the first respondent, SC itself is the second respondent. It was filed on July 17, and after the advocate on record rectified defects pointed out by the registry, SC registered the petition on July 24. Interestingly, while the petition "XXX vs Union of India" is listed at serial number 56 before the bench headed by Justice Datta, another petition by advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, seeking registration of FIR against Justice Varma to unravel the mystery behind the cash, its burning and subsequent disappearance, is listed at serial number 59 before the same bench on Monday. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Flights, Rentals & Accommodations Hotel Deals | Search Ads Browse Now Undo Meanwhile, Lok Sabha has admitted a notice for removal against Justice Varma signed by more than 150 MPs. The LS speaker is likely to write this week to CJI B R Gavai seeking names of an SC judge and an HC chief justice, who would be part of an inquiry committee under the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968. The speaker will nominate a distinguished jurist to complete the composition of the three-member committee headed by the SC judge. Repatriated to the Allahabad HC from the Delhi HC after the 'cash-in-kothi' controversy, Justice Varma in his petition has challenged the validity of the in-house inquiry report finding him guilty of the unaccounted cash at his residential premises and requested SC to declare the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna's May 8 recommendation to the President and the PM for his removal as unconstitutional.
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
Trial court not the first stop for investigation, says Supreme Court
NEW DELHI: SC has barred trial courts from directly entertaining complaints and ordering police to investigate them by ruling that prior to moving court for probing a cognisable offence, a person must approach jurisdictional police for registration of FIR. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S V N Bhatti said, "A magistrate ought not ordinarily entertain an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) directly unless the informant has availed and exhausted his remedies provided under Section 154 (3) of the code." Writing the judgment in a cross-case, Justice Mithal said magistrates must ask the informant to first approach the officer-in-charge of the police station and then the superintendent of police. "It is well recognized in law that the person aggrieved must first exhaust the alternative remedies available to him in law before approaching the court of law. In other words, he cannot ordinarily approach the court directly," he said. The bench did a conjoint reading of sections 154, 156 and 190 of the CrPC and said, "It is crystal clear that an informant who wants to report about a commission of a cognisable offence has to, in the first instance, approach the officer-in-charge of the police station for setting the criminal law into motion by lodging an FIR." "However, if such information is not accepted by the officer-in-charge of the police station and he refuses to record it, the remedy of the informant is to approach the SP concerned. It is only subsequent to availing the above opportunities that if he is not successful, he may approach the magistrate under section 156(3) of the CrPC for necessary action or of taking cognisance in accordance with section 190 of the CrPC," the bench said. SC said if the information about a cognisable offence is not being recorded by the officer-in-charge of the police station or even by the SP, then the person aggrieved or the informant "may move the court the magistrate concerned to get the FIR registered and lodged with the concerned police station."
