Chennai: The Madras high court has ordered notice to the state government on a public interest litigation which sought to forbear the authorities from proceeding with admission on the basis of the prospectus 2014-15 issued by the Tamil Nadu private professional colleges association — health Services, for admission of students under the management quota to the MBBS
course.
A division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M. Sathyanarayanan, posted to September 17 further hearing of the PIL filed by advocate G. Vijayakumar. The PIL also sought to direct the authorities to issue fresh prospectus for admission to ensure the filling up of seats under the management quota only on the basis of merit, transparency and fairness.
According to the petitioner, he was shocked to read a news report that there was an open demand of capitation fee up to Rs 50 lakh and more, for admission to the MBBS course for 2014-15 in self-financing colleges.
His enquiries revealed that the committee to regulate-monitor admission of students to professional courses by self-financing professional, arts and science colleges was not functioning properly.
The TN private professional colleges association had created lacunae and lapses in the prospectus willfully to facilitate blocking of seats by colleges and allot these through secret deals on purely commercial basis. This was why different conditions were planted in the prospectus to exclude bona fide students seeking admission on merit, he alleged.
He said though the MCI had not permitted six colleges to admit students, this was not indicated in the prospectus. Moreover, a new condition had been inserted — that candidates who had applied for MBBS 2014-15 session were deemed to have read the contents in the prospectus, agreed with the conditions and would not have the right to
challenge any of the clauses.
The admission fee fixed by the committee had not been mentioned and the candidate had to remain within the clutches of the college managements till admission was completed on September 30.
The act of non-disclosure of fees under the management quota for 2014-15 implied lack of transparency on the part of the committee and the association, he added.
