Madras HC slams DME for frequent change of counselling rules, orders to pay Rs 2.5 lakh to doctor
Chennai: Taking cognizance of the frequent change of rules for during counselling for Postgraduate medical admissions, Madras High Court bench recently slammed the Selection Committee of Directorate of Medical Education (DME).
The committee issued a notification on October 31 and stated that those who had not joined the seats allotted to them in the first two rounds of counselling, would not be allowed to take part in the further counselling. However, suddenly the concerned notification was retracted on November 02, 2022.
A bench of Justice R. Subramanian opined that the DME committee had allegedly "helped certain individuals" by changing the rules time and again during the counselling process. It has also slapped the committee with Rs 2.5 lakh compensation that shall be paid to a woman doctor, who had joined the college that had been allotted to her in the second round of counselling on November 2 as she was afraid that she would not get the chance to appear in the mop-up round of counselling.
"There appears to be perennial confusion in the minds of the selection committee, be it intentional or accidental. The object behind the clause preventing applicants from participating in the mop-up or stray counselling is not clear. But, the subsequent happenings namely, the withdrawal within two days leaves me to firmly believe that there has been an attempt to derail the counselling process and help certain individuals," observed the bench.
However, taking note of the fact that orders directing to conduct the counselling sessions afresh would affect around 223 candidates, the HC bench expressed its unwillingness to disturb the entire mop-up round. In this regard, the bench also noted that the petitioners had approached the court on December 2 only, the last day of stray counselling.
"The selection committee has been highly negligent and recalcitrant in conducting the counselling... It is made clear that the selection committee shall behave in a more responsible manner at least in future and avoid such misgivings among the students," it further noted.
The HC bench was considering two petitions filed by a group of doctors. While in the first plea, there were six petitioners, the second plea had been filed by around 30 doctors.
As per the latest media report by The Hindu, the counsel for the doctors, Ma.P. Thangavel had argued that change of rules during the counselling was intentional on the part of the selection committee with an aim to mislead the petitioners and help certain other individuals who were waiting for the mop-up and the stray counselling process.
However, the bench noted that in case of the first plea, three out of six petitioners had joined their allotted seats in the first round of counselling since the seats allotted to them in the second round were not any better. Similarly, two other doctors had joined their seats in the second round on November 4. Therefore, the bench opined that no prejudice had been caused to them.
It was observed by the bench that only one doctor faced certain amount of prejudice because she was forced to join the college allotted to her in the second round of counselling on November 2 as she feared that she would not be able to take part in the mop-up counselling.
Taking note of this, the bench ordered the DME selection committee to pay Rs 2.5 lakh as compensation to the concerned woman doctor.
Regarding the second plea filed by 30 other doctors, the bench opined them to be fence sitters who were waiting for the result of the cases filed by the other doctors and had joined the bandwagon to cancel the entire mop-up and stray counselling process. Finding no reason to entertain their case, the bench did not offer them any relief.
