CMC Vellore MBBS Selection Process Chennai High Court Judgement
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.07.2007
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.P. SHAH, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. JYOTHIMANI.
WRIT APPEAL Nos.494, 812 and 495 of 2007
P. Arunkumar ..Appellant in
WA.494 and 495 of 2007
J. Jotheebun ..Appellant in
WA.812 of 2007
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Secretary to Government
Education Department
Fort St. George
Chennai 9.
2. Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University
No.69 Anna Salai
Guindy
Chennai 32
rep. By its Registrar.
3. Christian Medical College
Vellore 632 002
rep. By its Registrar. ..Respondents in
WA.494 of 2007
1. Christian Medical College
Vellore Association
rep. By its Secretary
Vellore
Tamil Nadu.
2. The Permanent Committee for the Conduct of Common
Entrance Examination in Private Colleges
NCB 7A
Greenways Road
Chennai.
3. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Secretary (Health)
Fort St. George
Chennai.
4. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Secretary (Education)
Fort St. George
Chennai.
5. The Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University
rep. By its Registrar
40 A
Anna Salai
Chennai 32. ..Respondents in
WA.495 of 2007
1. Christian Medical College
Vellore 632 002
rep. By its Registrar
Vellore 632 002
Tamil Nadu.
2. Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University
No.69
Anna Salai
Guindy
Chennai 32
rep. By its Registrar.
3. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Secretary to Government
Education Department
Fort St. George
Chennai 9. ..Respondents in
WA.812 of 2007
Writ Appeals are filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act against the Common Order of the learned single Judge dated 13.02.2007 made in WP.Nos. 32522, 18384 and 36500 of 2006 respectively.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For appellant in WA.494 & 495 of 2007 :
:Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy,Sr.Counsel for Mr. K. Ravichandra Babu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For appellant in WA.812/07 :
:Mr.Vineet Subramani for Mrs. Gladys Danial
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For R3 in WA.494 and R1 in WA.495/07 :
:Mr.Anil Divan,Sr.Counsel for M/s. Ramasubramaniam Assts.
Assisted by Mr.Krishna Srinivas & Mr. A.L. Somayaji,Sr.Counsel
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For R1 in WA.494 R3&R4 in WA.495 & R3 in WA.812/07. :
:Mr. Raja Kalifulla Government Pleader
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
COMMON JUDGEMENT
(DELIVERED BY P. JYOTHIMANI,J.)
These writ appeals are directed against the common order passed by the learned single Judge dated 13.02.2007 made in W.P.Nos.32522, 18384 and 36500 of 2006 respectively, by which the writ petitions filed by the Christian Medical College, Vellore in W.P.No.18384 of 2006, stood allowed by setting aside the portion of the order of the Permanent Committee for the Conduct of Common Entrance Examination in Private Colleges, dated 10.06.2006 invalidating allotment of six seats for children of the members of the Staff of the Institution (CMC) and dismissing the other two writ petitions filed by the students in W.P.Nos.32552 and 36500 of 2006.
2. The first respondent Christian Medical College (CMC), Vellore (hereinafter referred to as Institution), is a Christian Minority Un-aided Professional Medical College, affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University. The said institution is a registered Society, consisting of nearly 53 different Indian Christian Churches and Christian Organisations situated almost all the States in India with the objective of promoting education and consequential health care to students and patients belonging to the length and breadth of India and also several neighbouring countries. This institution has been in existence for the past 100 years, admitting students in Unaided, Non-capitation Fee with minority status based on merit on all India basis by conducting All India Common Entrance Examination, followed by an in-depth interview and the said method is stated to have been in vogue for the past 55 years.
2(a). The said Institution has started its first Post-Graduate programme in 1950 and as on date there are 11 Post-Graduate Medical Diploma courses; 20 Post-Graduate Medical Degree Courses and 9 Higher Speciality courses approved by the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R. Medical University. That apart, there are M.Sc., courses in 4 Medical Sciences and 21 Departments are recognised for Ph.D., training.
2(b). In respect of M.B.B.S. course conducted by the Institution, the total sanctioned strength of the students is 60. Out of the total strength 84% of the seats, viz., 50 seats are reserved for candidates from Christian minority community; remaining 16% of seats, viz., 10 seats are filled up in the following manner:
(i) 7 seats are filled up on all India Open Competition basis;
(ii)2 seats reserved for SC/ST category of students; and
(iii)1 seat for candidate nominated by the Government of India.
The remaining 50 seats are filled up in the following manner:
(i)10 seats are filled up from the Christian candidates from socially and economically backward States;
(ii)Out of the remaining 40 seats, 6 seats are filled up from the children of the eligible members and staff of the Institution in lieu of NRI quota and the remaining 34 seats are filled up from among Christian minority candidates on the basis of All India Open Competition.
2(c). The method of selection is by conducting All India Common Entrance Examination for 40% weightage; Tasks test with 20% weightage and interview by Group Observers with 40% weightage. With regard to Christian minority students, out of the 40% weightage for interview, 10% is for written test on Bible knowledge and the remaining 30% for oral interview. The written tests are conducted for 300 marks in five subjects, viz., Physics, Chemistry, Biology, General ability, Speed and Accuracy. The marks obtained by the candidates are subsequently made in the form of Grade under the Stanine Grading System and according to the Institution, selection in the said manner is in vogue for the past many years without any complaint whatsoever only based on merit in a transparent manner and without any exploitation.
2(d). It is also the case of the Institution that no capitation fee is collected from the students selected and the tuition fees itself is much less than even the fees fixed by the Government. Since the students belonging to minority are drawn through out India all live together in the campus with practical demonstration and national integration.
2(e). It is the case of the Institution that the students of minority category who are admitted, have to give a commitment to go back after the completion of the Under Graduate education and work for atleast two years in the hospitals run by the Churches. According to the Institution, the process of selection is proved to be a grand success. When the State Government insisted for implementation of the scheme as framed by the Supreme Court in Unni Krishnan's case (1993 (4) SCC 111), the Institution has moved the Supreme Court in 1993 by filing Writ Petition No.482 of 1993 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, which was admitted and the Supreme Court was pleased to grant interim orders, permitting the Institution to carry on its own admission procedure and similar orders have been passed till 2003. After the judgement of the Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education vs. State of Karnataka (2003 (6) SCC 697) in the year 2003, by which the State Government has constituted Two Committees and pending the constitution of such Committees also the Supreme Court has permitted the Institution to follow the previous practice in respect of admission, which has been followed for the past 55 years.
2(f). Likewise, in the year 2004-2005 also when the Committees were yet to be constituted by the State Government, on filing of Writ Petition in W.P.No.7380 of 2004, this Court in WPMP.No.8728 of 2004 has granted an order of interim injunction on 04.03.2004, restraining the respondents therein from interfering with the admission of students to the medical and other courses for the academic year 2004-2005 by the Institution. When a clarification was sought for in the Supreme Court in respect the decision rendered in 2003 (6) SCC 697 (cited supra), in the writ petition filed by Catholic Bishop's Conference of India Society for Medical Education running the institution like St. Johns Medical College, Bangalore, in W.P.No.330 of 2004, the Supreme Court by an order dated 30.07.2004, has clearly recognised the rights of the said institution, including that of CMC, Vellore to follow their own procedure for admission. Ultimately, after that, the institution has also filed an intervening petition in I.A.No.5 of 2005 in W.P.No.330 of 2004. The Apex Court by order dated 12.08.2005 has held that Minority Un-aided Educational Institutions are protected by Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India and they are free to admit all students of their own community and that the States have no right to enforce the policy of reservation on them. At the same time, the Supreme Court has also held that the States were entitled to constitute Committees for monitoring the admission procedure and determining fee structure respectively to avoid exploitation and to preserve merit and transparency in admission.
2(g). It is the case of the Institution that after the State Government has constituted the Permanent Committee for Common Entrance Test for Private Educational Institutions, it has dismissed the application made by the College on 12.07.2005. The petitioner has filed I.A.No.6 of 2005 in W.P.No.261 of 2003 in the Supreme Court, praying for an order of stay of the Committee and also for direction to the Institution to continue to admit students as per the practice in vogue for the past 55 years. The Supreme Court by an order dated 25.07.2005, while staying the portion of the order of the Committee dated 12.07.2005, permitted the Institution to follow the same procedure of admission as it was held in the year 2004-2005.
2(h). After the Supreme Court has disposed of the batch of cases in P.A. Inamdar vs. State of Maharashtra (2004 (8) SCC 139), the above interim orders passed by the Supreme Court in respect of the Institution have been merged. In the meantime, for admission in the year 2006-2007, the members of the governing council of CMC, Vellore, have devised a new mechanism, by effecting changes based on the observations made by the Permanent Committee in the order dated 12.07.2005. The Committee has taken exception in respect of the filling up of 39 seats based on the sponsorship of candidates from the members of the Churches and Organisations based on interse merit. It was based on the observation of the Committee, the Council governing the Institution has taken a decision that in respect of 34 seats, the selection should be from among the Christian minority candidates on All India Open Competition basis by removing the sponsorship. For the academic year 2006-2007, when the Institution has issued notification for admission of students and at that time when a representation was made to the Committee, the Committee, has permitted the Institution to have its own admission procedure by order dated 10.06.2006, recognising the basis and procedure adopted as being fair and non-exploitative, however, took exception in respect of admission of six candidates from the children of eligible members of the staff of the Institution. It is, as against that portion of the order of the Committee dated 10.06.20096, the College has filed W.P.No.18384 of 2006.
3. The petitioners in W.P.No.32552 and 36500 of 2006 were students, who have applied for admission to MBBS course in the year 2006-2007 and in the Entrance Examination conducted by the Institution, the writ petitioner in W.P.No.32552 of 2006 was given B Grade, which is in between 79% to 89%. Likewise, the petitioner in W.P.No.36500 of 2006 was given B+ Grade in the entrance examination, having obtained the mark between 90 to 96%. They have also participated in the Group Task as well as Interview, in which according to them, they have fared very well. However, they were not selected for the year 2006-2007 and therefore they have filed Writ Petitions for direction against the Institution to admit them based on the marks obtained by them in the Entrance Examination, contending inter-alia that they also belong to the Christian minority, but the method of selection followed by the Institution is not transparent or understandable. It was their further case that the 10 students out of 50 allotted to minority candidates are admitted from the States like North-Eastern States, wherein Christians were non-minority, that admission to six students of eligible staff members of the Institution is not legal, that non-publishing of rank list in the Entrance Examination vitiates the process of selection, apart from other grounds. It is also their case that by the selection process followed by the Institution, the triple test enunciated by the Supreme Court, viz., Merit, Transparency and Non-exploitative has not been scrupulously followed and therefore, the selection process is bad. It is their further case that more than 40% marks allotted for interview is against the decision of the Supreme Court, wherein a ceiling limit of 15% marks was fixed for interview. Further, the Institution is not entitled to claim protection under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, since it has not admitted predominant students of Christian minority belonging to the State of Tamil Nadu, even though a sprinkling of such students could be admitted from other States.
4. The learned single Judge has formulated the contentions raised on behalf of the said writ petitioners/students in the following five heads, which reads as under:
(a) The Institution conducts (i) a Common Written Entrance Examination to which 40% of the marks are allotted, (ii) certain tests terms as Group Tasks for which 20% of the total marks are allotted and (iii) an interview for which 40% of the total marks are allotted. In respect of Christian students, the marks allotted for interview are reduced to 30% of the total marks and they are made to write a Written Test in Bible knowledge, to which 10% of the total marks are allotted. Therefore, the first issue raised by the unselected candidates is as to whether an Institution is entitled to allot 40% of the total marks for interview, in the light of various decisions of the Supreme Court fixing a ceiling limit of 15% of marks for interview.
(b) Even the allotment of marks in the Written Examination, Group Tasks and Interview, are not done in a straight, plain and simple manner. The marks are converted at every stage into a system known as Stanine Grading and the selection of candidates finally depends upon the grade obtained by them, in the final tally, which according to the unselected candidates failed the test of transparency in the matter of selection.
( c ) As a minority educational institution claiming protection under Article 30 of the Constitution, the Institution was obligated to admit a predominant number of students belonging to the State of Tamilnadu, though a sprinkling of such students from other States could also be actually admitted only 5 candidates belonging to the Christian minority community from the State of Tamilnadu, thereby failing the test of State as the unit for determining the minority status of the Institution.
(d) The reservation of 10 seats made by the Institution for Christian candidates from socially and economically backward States, included within its ambit, candidates from the North Eastern States. Two of the North Eastern States have Christians as the majority population and hence according to the unselected candidates, the selection of Christian students from States in which they form a majority, defeated the purpose of grant of minority status and also violated the law laid down by the Supreme Court.
(e) The question whether the reservation upto six seats for the children of eligible members of the staff of the Institution falls within the frame work of reasonable classification permitted by the Constitution is the last issue raised by the unselected candidates and the same has also been found against the Institution by the Permanent Committee.
4(a). After considering each and every one of the points raised, the learned Judge, while dismissing the writ petitions filed by the students and allowing the writ petition filed by the Institution has held that, allotting of 40% of the total marks for interview in the selection process adopted by the Institution cannot be blindly held to be vitiated. In respect of the selection process, viz., Stanine Grading, Group Tasks followed by the Institution, the learned Judge has held that, inasmuch as the method of procedure has been adopted for many years even though the process is complicated, it was evaluated by the specialists in the field, and the same cannot be lightly set at naught.
4(b). Regarding the issue relating to the number of students belonging to minority to be admitted from State of Tamil Nadu, the learned Judge, relying on the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court In re Kerala Education Bill, 1957, AIR 1958 SC 956, wherein the Twin Object Test was laid down and by taking into consideration of the status of the Institution, which is belonging to Christian minority, conducting examination on all India basis and on the application of the wider sense of the word minority has held that there is no error on the part of the Institution in admitting large number of Christian minority students from other States.
4(c). While dealing with the admission of 10 seats reserved for the Christian students from the States where they are majority, considering that on fact, only one Christian student from Mehalaya State, wherein Christians are majority was admitted, and therefore, the same can be considered only as a sprinkling, which is permitted in Kerala Educational Bill case (cited supra) upto the latest judgement of the Supreme Court in P.A. Inamdar's case (2004 (8) SCC 139), the learned Judge has held that the contention raised in that regard was not tenable.
4(d). While dealing with the six seats for children of staff members of the Institution, the learned Judge has approved the same on the principle of institutional preference and also on the basis that such preference will strengthen the value base and moral para-meters, for which the Institution stands.
5. It is, as against the said common order of the learned single Judge, the above appeals are filed. The order of the learned single Judge is assailed by the appellants on various grounds, viz.,
(i) The procedure adopted by the Institution for selection is unfair and not transparent;
(ii) The stanine grading system is not only un-understandable and in that sense of view, the procedure is not transparent and therefore, the selection based on the same cannot be held to be based on merits;
(iii) The selection process consist of 40% for Entrance Examination while the remaining 60% is in effect allotted for oral interview even though it is stated that 20% is for Group Tasks. In view of the above said predominant role given for oral interview in the selection process, the entire process of selection is vitiated, since the Supreme Court in St. Stephen's case (1992 (1) SCC 558) has held that 15% for the oral interview can be the permissible limit generally;
(iv) In the oral interview, questions were posed to the students which are not only irrelevant to the course to which they have applied, but such questions which can have different answers in common parlance and there are no proper guidelines for the purpose of assessing the value of the students and therefore, the selection process should not be termed as non-exploitative in nature;
(v) The selection process is against the principles laid down by the 11 Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case (2002 (8) SCC 481).
(vi) The reservation for the Wards of staff is illegal. The seats which are allotted for NRIs cannot be granted to the children of the staff members of the Institution.
6. Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.494 of 2007 would submit that the procedure adopted by the Institution is non-transparent and unfair and opposed to the law declared by the Supreme Court in P.A.Inamdar's case (2004(8)SCC 139).
6(a) He further submitted that by the process of evaluation of answer sheets in the Entrance Examination, by which the arithmetical marks are converted into stanine grade and later sought to be evaluated for 40%, while the remaining 60% is assigned for Bible test, Group Tasks and interview in the form of 10, 20 and 30 marks respectively, has resulted in the candidates obtaining higher marks in the Entrance Examination to get lesser rank on account of the stanine grading and also in the Group Tasks and oral interview and the said process is opposed to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case (2002 (8) SCC 481).
6(b). He would also submit that in paragraphs 58 and 59 of the judgement in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case,the Supreme Court has held that in respect of professional education, greater emphasis must be shown on merit, which is usually determined on the basis of the marks obtained in the qualifying examinations, followed by interview or by common entrance test. Basing reliance on the judgement of the Supreme Court in P.A. Inamdar's case he submits that there should be distinction between professional and non-professional educational institutions and in respect of professional education, merit and excellence alone should be the criteria and by applying the above said tests, according to the learned senior counsel, the procedure should be deemed to be non-transparent and unfair and cannot be termed as merit based.
6(c). He would further submit that allotting of 20% for Group Tasks and 30% for interview shows that the same has no connection with the merit of the candidate at all. It is also his submission that when the applicants are in the age group of 17 to 19 years, such a high percentage given for oral interview can only result in the arbitrariness in the selection process, which will be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as held by the Supreme Court in Ajay Hasia's case (1981 (1) SCC 722). The right of the Institution under Article 30 of the Constitution as a minority institution must be in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India and according to the learned senior counsel, the prescription of marks for interview if it is above 15%, the same is not only violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, but is also against the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in Ajay Hasia's case.
6(d). He would further submit that the reservation of 6 seats in favour of the children of the staff of the Institution is unconstitutional. He would refer to the order of the Permanent Committee for Common Entrance Test for Private Educational Institutions dated 10.06.2000, wherein the Committee has held that such reservation is not permissible. The learned senior counsel contends that the word institutional preference has a distinct meaning and the children of the staff of the Institution would not fall within the category of Institutional Preference. The classification according to him would not satisfy the twin test of Article 14 and such classification based on constitutionally prohibited category and based on descent, and therefore, it constitutes an unreal classification having no nexus to the object sought to be achieved.
6(e). He would also submit that the Institution being a minority institution, must cater to the needs of the students of the minority community of the State of Tamil Nadu, in which it is located, by filling up only a sprinkling of seats from minority students of other States. Inasmuch as it is well settled that State is the unit for determining minority status, as observed by the Supreme Court in P.A.Inamdhar's case, and on fact only five students have been admitted from the State of Tamil Nadu in this year, it violates the norms laid down by the Supreme Court.
7. Mr. Vineet Subramani, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.Nos.812 and 495 of 2007, apart from adopting the arguments of Mr. R.Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel, would submit that the individual task for which 20% of marks have been allotted and it took only three minutes for each of the students and the conversation during this short period of time could not be for the actual task matter and only on the subjective issue, which require a high maturity mind and the same cannot be expected from the students of the age group of 16 to 18 years.
7(a). It is also his submission that the Test Observers of each group are different and therefore there is a possibility for different assessment by different staff members and there is no chance for comparison to have a common selection process. He would also refer to the various questions asked in the interview like the opinion of the students about love marriage and arranged marriage, etc. and contend that the same cannot be the ground for selection of students to MBBS course.
7(b). He would submit that by considering the entire process, 60% of total weightage is given to the interview process, which is not permissible. According to him, the appellant has secured C+ Grade and the Institution has admitted candidates who have secured C+ Grade, while the appellant was not given admission.
7(c). He would also submit that only 5 candidates belonging to the Christian minority in the State of Tamil Nadu were admitted by the Institution. Further, the reservation quota of six seats for staff of the Institution, which was allotted to the candidates is regardless of religious beliefs and therefore the staff quota is not connected with the Christian minority status.
7(d). The learned counsel would submit that when 60% is allotted for oral interview, the question is, as to whether such weightage actually distorted the written examination and marks secured in the qualifying examination, especially when the Supreme Court has held that the allocation generally for interview may not be more than 15% by referring to Ajay Hasias's case (1981 (1) SCC 722) and also in Mohinder Sain Garg Vs. State of Punjab (1991 (1) SCC 662), apart from Ashok Kumar Yadav vs. State of Haryana (1985 (4) SCC 417). His submission is that the admission to the professional courses must be based on merit subject to objective and rational procedure of selection as laid down by the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case (2002 (8) SCC 481) and the merit should be the criteria.
7(e). By placing reliance on the judgement of St. Stephen's case, he would also submit that the oral interview as a supplementary test cannot be taken as exclusive test for assessing the suitability of candidates and the identifying circumstances can be only,
(i)common qualifying examination which would enable comparison of the relative merit of candidates;
(ii)a single/same Interview Committee that interviewed every candidate; and
(iii)admission was based on a consensus taking into account the views of each member of the common Interview Committee.
7(f). He would also submit that inasmuch as there are no norms prescribed for admission, which is objective and transparent, the interview by which 60% of mark is given cannot be treated as transparent and it will only result in nepotism and arbitrariness.
7(g). He further submit that the interview process even if it is legal, it must be connected with the object to which the candidate is seeking admission. His further submission is that the first respondent has never revealed the selection process, the initial and/or final results. He would submit that the selection process in the interview based on poverty; overcoming social/family hardship and societal/charitable activity was identified only in respect of one candidate as per the papers produced before the Court. Therefore, according to him, the entire process of selection followed by the Institution are opposed to the triple test of merit, transparency and non-exploitative.
8. On the other hand, Mr. Anil Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Institution while referring to the special features and unique nature of the Institution has forcefully contended that the uniqueness of this Institution has been consistently recognised by the Supreme Court from 1993 in various orders passed from time to time, including the latest judgement in P.A. Inamdar's case (2004 (8) SCC 139). He would submit that uniqueness of the Institution lies in the commitment to the care of the under privileged, women and children following the footsteps of the founder Dr.Ida Sophia Scudder. He would also submit that the tuition fee charged for MBBS course for the last several years is only Rs.3000/- per annum, much less than the fee fixed by the State Government in its Medical Colleges and also lower than the fee fixed by the Committees constituted as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He would submit that the motivation is to serve through the selection process and strengthen by modified Gurukul system of education with compulsory residence in hostels and assigning students as Foster Children to Faculty families. The idea is to create a potent re-inforcing factor. He would submit that the Institution has been admitting students on All India basis with an Entrance Examination and interview from 1948 and the same has never been challenged at any point of time in any Court of law and according to him the system evolved by the Institution has been subsequently followed by other institutions like All India Institute of Medical Sciences. He would also submit that every single student called for interview is academically meritorious and qualified to undergo the training as a Doctor and elaborate interview process assesses the suitability and adaptability for that training to be imparted in the Institution, which is unique in keeping with its mission and objectives.
8(a). He would elaborately clarify as to how the interview was conducted for three days with a close scrutiny of candidates at every stage and as to how the Group Observers have spend with the candidates to assess their suitability for training at Vellore. He has submitted that the Group Observers are from senior faculty of the Institution who interview them individually based on the pre-established criteria and guidelines to assess their suitability for being trained as Doctors at the Institution. He has also taken pain to explain the stanine system, as to how the system has been acclaimed world wide and followed without any objections from any part and he has also explained as to how the grading system in respect of each subjects have been in stanine mode and as to how they are converted from Grade to Score and Score added upto Preliminary Test Average (PTA) Grade.
8(b). The learned senior counsel would also place reliance on the judgement of the Supreme Court in St. Stephen's College vs. University of Delhi (1992 (1) SCC 558), wherein the Supreme Court has permitted to allot 100% marks for interview having regard to the objective and purpose for which the Institution was established, by taking into consideration of the judgement in Ajay Hasia's case (1981 (1) SCC 722) and the same was subsequently considered and approved by the 11 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pail Foundation case (2002 (8) SCC 481).
8(c). He would also submit that short listing of candidates for calling for interview was based on academic merit by taking into consideration of marks in each one of the five subjects in the entrance examination and by Grading Standard Nine or Stanine system. In respect of the reservation of six seats for children of staff he would refer to the judgement of the Supreme Court in P.A. Inamdar's case, wherein the allotment of seats under NRI category subject to not exceeding 15% for the purpose of utilising the money received under the said category for benefiting the students, such as economically weaker section of the society was approved.
8(d). According to the learned senior counsel, the first respondent Institution does not have the NRI quota or Management quota or any reservation for the Founders of the Institution and the six seats are given to the benefit of the staff of the Institution, who are the human wealth, to whom the small privilege has been extended. He would also submit even allotment of six seats are clearly based on the guidelines as stated in the prospectus, viz., that the staff members should have completed 10 continuous years of service in the Institution or retired or died after having worked in the Institution for 10 continuous years, for whose children, the criteria of eligibility has been conferred, of course by following the merit system. He would also submit that such reservation is having a reasonable and intelligible differentia and having a rational basis.
8(e). He would also submit that the Institution is a All India Institution having been established in the year 1900, catering to the needs of the minority, viz., Christian, and therefore, it cannot be said that it should cater to the required needs of the Christian minority from the State of Tamil Nadu alone, especially when All India character of the Institution has been recognised by the Universally.
8(f). He would submit that in respect of the admission of Christian students from States where they are majority, it is only sprinkling number of students who have been admitted and that is also recognised by the Supreme Court in Kerala Educational Bill case (AIR 1958 SC 956).
9. We have heard Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel for the appellant in WA.No.812 of 2007, Mr. Vineet Subramani, learned counsel for the appellant in W.A.Nos.494 and 495 of 2007 and Mr. Anil Divan, learned senior counsel for the Institution and perused the order of the learned single Judge apart from all other records.
10. On the total analysis of the issues involved in this case, the following points are arise for consideration:
(i)Whether the process of selection and its procedure and method followed by the Institution for selection of First Year MBBS course in the year 2006-2007 is fair and can be treated as the selection based on merit and transparent. Broadly this includes the marks allotted for the competitive written examination, group tasks and the validity and legality of allotment of 40% marks for interview and the method of Stanine Grading system?
(ii)As a minority educational Institution claiming protection under Article 30 of the Constitution of India, can the Institution be permitted to admit only a few students belonging to the minority religion from the State of Tamil Nadu, while the test for determining minority is by way of State as the unit?
(iii)Whether the reservation of six seats for the children of eligible members of the staff of the Institution is reasonable?
(iv)Whether the reservation of 10 seats for the candidates from socially and economically backward States is permissible, when the States from which students were admitted were not minority in respect of Christian religion based on population?
11. Before adverting to the above said points, we are of the view that consideration of the nature of the Institution, objects for which it was started and its working in these years and also the various orders passed by the Apex Court in respect of the Institution relating to the manner of admission, will give a definite and lasting solution to the issues involved in this case.
12. The Christian Medical College, Vellore, which is governed by a registered Society called Vellore Christian Medical College Association enumerates in its bye-laws, its objectives as "the establishment, maintenance and development of Christian Medical College and Hospitals in India, where women and men shall receive an education of the highest grade in the Art and Science of Medicine and of Nursing, or in one or other of the related professions, to equip them in the spirit of Christ for service in the relief of suffering and the promotion of health." The Institution is an Un-aided, Minority Educational Institution, without collecting capitation fees from the students and is in existence for over 100 years. In the past nearly 55 years, the Institution has been following the method of admission on the All India Entrance Examination, followed by an in-depth interview.
13. The Institution was started in the year 1891, when 21 year old Ida Sophia Scudder, the daughter of an American Missionary staying in Tindivanam was virtually affected by the death of three young Indian women during child birth for want of proper medical aid. It was with the idea that the women in India needed women Doctors to look after them, the said Ida Scudder is stated to have returned to United States and graduated as the First Woman Doctor from Cornell University and after obtaining training in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, she returned to India in 1900 and started a small clinic at Vellore. Thereafter, she started Training Compounders in 1903 and Nurses in 1909. Due to the intervention of the First World War, she was able to start the Missionary Medical School for Women, to make them as a licentiate medical practitioner only in the year 1918. In 1942, the course was upgraded to MBBS course, affiliated to Madras University. Admission was thrown open for the MBBS course in the year 1947. Initially, the Institution which was started in the Madras Presidency, which included the present Tamil Nadu and other States of Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, and gradually the activities of the Institution was expanded by making the admission of students on All India Entrance Examination followed by an in-depth interview from the year 1948. In the year 1960, the number of intake of under-graduate MBBS students was increased to 60 and thereafter, large number of Higher Speciality Courses, Post-graduate Medical courses, Allied Health Science courses and Courses in Nursing have been developed.
14. It is also stated by the Institution that on the analysis of the data in the Alumni Office of the Institution in 2002, it has shown that upto 1992, 66% of the Medical Graduates from the Institution were serving in India and 4 out of 5 of them were in Rural areas. The Institution is the first in the country to admit students on All India basis with an Entrance Examination and interview from 1948 and it also remains a fact that till date the admission procedure has not been challenged in any Court of law, except in the present writ proceedings. Therefore, the emphasis is on the objectives of the Institution to the ideal of service to the disadvantaged and the marginalised based on the mandate by Christ and it is in accordance with the said ideology the process of selection is made. It is with that background the selection process as enumerated above have been followed by the Institution in these long number of years.
15. The said procedure which are unique and followed by the Institution under the special circumstances stated above, viz., in accordance with the spirit of the religious and service motive has been consistently recognised by the Supreme Court from 1993, as it is seen on records. It is on record that the Institution, in 1993, has approached the Apex Court by filing W.P.No.482 of 1993, which is also stated to be forming part of the batch of cases decided in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case (2002(8) SCC 481). That was the time when based on the judgement of the Supreme Court in Unni Krishnan's case (1993(4) SCC 111), the State Government has directed the Institution and other Institutions to implement the Scheme framed in the above case. The said writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the said action of the State Government and the Apex Court by an interim order dated 05.07.1997, while admitting the writ petition passed as follows:
"Issue notice returnable within 10 days.
In the meantime, the State of Tamil Nadu shall not allot any seat in the petitioner Institution for admission to any other candidate not selected by the petitioner. "
The Five Judge Constitution Bench of the Apex Court while dealing with the prayer in the said Writ Petition, viz., W.P.No.482 of 1993 and taking note of the fact that the admission in the Institution is done on the basis of merit, without capitation fee, fee charged is not more than the one charged by the Governmental Institutions and there has been no complaint about the working of the Institution, has permitted the Institution including another Institution to admit students by following the procedure on the basis of the admission done in earlier years, however, stating that it is open to the Government to bring any irregularities pointed out and if such irregularities are brought to the notice of the Court, it would result in serious consequences. That was the judgement rendered in Shahal H. Musaliar vs. State of Kerala (1993 (4) SCC 112). The following portion are relevant for the purpose of this case.
" 15. The petitioner in W.P. No. 482 of 1993 runs a medical college at Vellore in the State of Tamil Nadu. According to the petitioner, it is a well-reputed institution, admission to which is made on the basis of an All-India entrance test conducted by the petitioner. It is stated that admissions are made on the basis of merit. It is submitted further that the college does not charge any capitation fee, that the fees charged by it is not more than the fees chargeable in similar governmental institutions and that there has never been any complaint about the working of the petitioner-institution. Shri Sitaraman, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu does not dispute the above averments though we may record again that no counter has as yet been filed in the matter. It is submitted by Shri Salve for the petitioner that during the vacations, a learned Single Judge has made an interim order in this writ petition directing the State of Tamil Nadu not to allot any seats to the petitioner-institution for admission of candidates not selected by the petitioner. Shri Salve, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted further that the process of admission is complete though admissions as such have not been made in view of the aforesaid orders of this Court.
16. Having regard to the above circumstances, we permit the petitioners in the above two writ petitions to admit students to their colleges on the basis of entrance test conducted by them and on the same basis on which admissions were made by them in the said colleges in the previous academic year. After completing the admissions, the petitioners shall furnish full particulars of the students admitted, the categories, if any, whereunder they were admitted and all other particulars relating to their admission. This information should be furnished to the competent authority, to the University to which the said colleges are affiliated and to the Secretary, Education Department, Government of Karnataka/Tamil Nadu. The said authorities shall verify whether the admissions have been made by the petitioners in accordance with the directions given herein. In case of irregularity, any of the said authorities shall be entitled to call upon the petitioner to rectify the said irregularity. It shall also be open to the competent authority, University and the Government of Karnataka/Tamil Nadu to bring any such irregularity to the notice of this Court by way of an interlocutory application for appropriate orders in that behalf. It is made clear that any violation of the directions given herein by the petitioners shall entail serious consequences inasmuch as the above orders are made based upon their representations and even before a counter-affidavit has been filed by the respective respondents in view of the urgency expressed by them."
16. That was again reiterated by the Five Judge Constitution Bench in T.M.A. Pai Foundation and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others in W.P.No.555 of 1993 dated 05.04.1994, in which W.P.No.482 of 1993, filed by the Institution was also forming part. The order runs as under:
"... Similarly as regards Writ Petition No.482 of 1993, it was observed that according to the petitioner in that case the medical college run by it at Vellore in the State of Tamil Nadu is a well reputed institution, admission to which is made on the basis of All-India entrance test conducted by the petitioner and that the admissions are made on the basis of merit and the fee charged by it is not more than the fees chargeable in similar governmental institutions and that there has never been any complaint about the working of this institution and it was observed that this fact was not disputed by Shri Sitaraman, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu. ..."
17. Likewise, in I.A.No.5A in WP.(C)No.482 of 1993 filed by the Institution for the year 1995-1996, the Apex Court by order dated 06.03.1995, permitted it to follow the same process of admission, which reads as under:
" The petitioner may grant admission for academic year 1995-96 for the MBBS First Year Course and also the other allied courses as per directions contained in the interim order of this Court dated August 18, 1993 and April 5, 1994 by conducting their own entrance test examination. I.A. is disposed of accordingly.
This court has been permitting the holding of entrance tests by the institutions themselves for the last 3 years by interim orders. The Registry to place the papers before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for obtaining fresh directions regarding constitution of the 7 Judge Bench to hear the case which was already heard by the 7 Judge Bench at length."
18. Similar orders were passed by the Apex Court for 1996-1997 in I.A.No.6 in W.P.(C)No.482 of 1993 dated 01.02.1996; for the academic year 1997-1998 in I.A.No.7 in WP.(C)No.482 of 1993 dated 29.01.1997; for 1998-1999 in I.A.No.8 in WP.(C)No.482 of 1993 dated 16.01.1998. Ultimately, it was in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case, the Apex Court has delivered judgement on 31.10.2002, recognising the rights of minorities under Article 30 of the Constitution of India and also the rights of Un-aided Minorities like that of the first respondent Institution. The Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case has prescribed certain percentage of seats to be allotted to the Government to satisfy the local needs in para 68, which reads as follows:
"68. .... For instance, a certain percentage of the seats can be reserved for admission by the management out of those students who have passed the common entrance test held by itself or by the State/university and have applied to the college concerned for admission, while the rest of the seats may be filled up on the basis of counselling by the State agency. This will incidentally take care of poorer and backward sections of the society. The prescription of percentage for this purpose has to be done by the Government according to the local needs and different percentages can be fixed for minority unaided and non-minority unaided and professional colleges. ... "
19. It is based on the said paragraph of the judgement of the Supreme Court, the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.Nos.96 and 99, requiring the Institution to admit students only in respect of 60% of the seats from the minority quota preferably from the All India Common Entrance Test held by the Institution and the balance 40% to be given to the State Government to be filled up through the Common Entrance Test held by the Government. It was challenging the said Government Order, the Institution has filed W.P.No.261 of 2003 in the Supreme Court and by a detailed interim order dated 03.07.2003, permitting the Institution to follow the same procedure for the academic year 2003-2004, the Apex Court has ordered as follows:
"Heard on the question of grant of interim relief. It is not disputed that the petitioner-institution is an unaided minority medical college and the admissions are made on merit based on All India Common Entrance Test conducted by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner College does not charge any capitation fee. The college has 60 seats for M.B.B.S. Course. Presently the seats are being filled up in the following manner:
-----------------------------------------------------
Seats reserved for Minority Community 45
-----------------------------------------------------
Seats kept apart voluntarily by the
petitioner Institution for the
following categories:
===================================
1. Open Merit 7
-----------------------------------------------------
2. SC/ST 3
-----------------------------------------------------
3. Economically Disadvantaged 4
-----------------------------------------------------
4. Central Government nominee 1
-----------------------------------------------------
------
Total 60
------
-----------------------------------------------------
The learned counsel for the parties have made their extensive submissions based on the 11 Judge Bench decision of this court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation and others vs. State of Karnataka and others in (2002(8) SCC 481). Our attention has been invited, in particular, to paragraph Nos.68, 138, 139, 144, 145, 149 and 161 (question No.4 and answer thereto). Prima facie, we are of the opinion that the allotment of seats in an unaided Minority Institution cannot be controlled by the Government. It is therefore, directed that for the current year i.e. 2003-2004 the allotment of seats shall be done in the same manner as has been done hitherto i.e. 45 seats shall be reserved for Minority Community and 15 seats shall b e kept apart from the categories open merit, SC/ST, economically disadvantaged and the Central Government nominees, as has been done before.
This is an interim arrangement and shall be subject to final decision in the writ petition.
However, all these allotments shall be without violating the rule of merit. "
20. Again, the said writ petition filed by the Institution was heard by the Five Judge Constitution Bench of the Apex Court together with several related matters in Islamic Academy of Education vs. State of Karnataka (2003 (6) SCC 697), wherein also the Supreme Court has again recognised the special features of the first respondent Institution in para 17, as follows:
" 17. At this juncture it is brought to our notice that several institutions, have since long, had their own admission procedure and that even though they have been admitting only students of their own community no finger has ever been raised against them and no complaints have been made regarding fairness or transparency of the admission procedure adopted by them. These institutions submit that they have special features and that they stand on a different footing from other minority non-aided professional institutions. It is submitted that their cases are not based only on the right flowing from Article 30(1) but in addition they have some special features which require that they be permitted to admit in the manner they have been doing for all these years. A reference is made to few such institutions i.e. Christian Medical college, Vellore, St. John's Hospital, Islamic Academy of Education et. The claim of these institutions was disputed. However, we do not think it necessary to go into those questions. We leave it open to the institutions which have been established and who have had their own admission procedure for, at least, the last 25 years to apply to the Committee set out hereinafter. "
21. It was consequent on the judgement of the Constitution Bench in Islamic Academy Education case stated above, the Supreme Court has disposed of W.P.No.261 of 2003, filed by the Institution on 18.09.2003 with the following order:
" Notwithstanding, the orders of resolutions made by the Government, if any, these matters are disposed of in the same terms as set forth in the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No.317/1993-T.M.A. Pai Foundation & Ors.Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.Etc. And connected batch decided on 31st October, 2002 and in Writ Petition (C) No.350 of 1993-Islamic Academy of Education and Ar. Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. And connected batch reported in 2003 (6) SCALE 325.
All statutory enactments, orders, schemes regulations will have to be brought in conformity with the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation's case decided on 31.10.2002. As and when any problem arises the same can be dealt with by an appropriate Forum in an appropriate proceedings. "
Therefore, it is clear that during 1993 to 2003, the Institution has been permitted by the Apex Court to follow its own procedure in admitting students.
22. It is the case of the Institution that after the judgement delivered in Islamic Academy Education case, permitting the constitution of Committees to supervise the admission and fees procedures and inasmuch as the Committee was not constituted by the State Government, the Institution again filed W.P.No.7380 of 2004 before this Court, challenging the order of the Government in issuing direction to the Institution, without constituting a Committee and this Court by an order dated 24.03.2004 in WPMP.Nos.8725 to 8727 of 2004 in W.P.Nos.7379 and 7380 of 2004, has permitted the Institution to follow the same procedure of admission in respect of the academic year 2004-2005 as follows:
" 2. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in 2003 (6) SCC 697 (cited supra): the earlier orders of the Supreme Court in W.P.Nos.261 of 2003 & 482 of 1993 and other series of orders passed by the Supreme Court allowing the petitioner to follow the earlier arrangement, there will be an order interim stay of the impugned order as prayed for and interim injunction is also granted for the very same reasoning. Learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice."
and it was thereafter, the State Government has constituted Two Committees, one for supervising the admissions and another for fees structure.
23. It is also relevant to point out that in the meantime, the Supreme Court was moved by some of the Institutions similar to that of the first respondent for clarification to follow the same procedure of admission, since there appeared to be a conflict between paragraphs 17 and 19. Ultimately, the Apex Court by order dated 30.07.2004 passed in W.P.No.330 of 2004 has given clarification to the said paragraphs in Islamic Academy case in 2003(6) SCC 697, which was as follows:
" There appears to be an obvious conflict between paragraph-17 and paragraph-19. For the time being, we prefer to adopt the reasoning in para-17 which allows a minority professional institute which has been carrying on the same procedure for the last more than 25 years to adopt its own procedure for admission in respect of its institution. "
24. The said writ petition, viz., W.P.No.330 of 2004, in which the first respondent Institution has filed an intervening petition, viz., I.A.No.5 of 2005 was decided along with large number of batch of cases by the Supreme Court in the recent pronouncement in P.A. Inamdhar and others vs. State of Maharashtra (2005 (6) SCC 537). The Supreme Court has again confirmed about the unique feature and the admission procedure of the minority educational institutions, delivered judgement on 12.08.2005 in the following words.
" 17. The majority opinion carved out an exception in favour of those minority educational professional institutions which were established and were having their own admission procedure for at least 25 years from the requirement of joining any common entrance test, and such institutions were permitted to have their own admission procedure. The State Governments were directed to appoint a permanent Committee to ensure that the tests conducted by the association of colleges are fair and transparent.
25. In the meantime, based on the consistent orders of the Supreme Court, the first respondent Institution has filed an application before the Permanent Committee for Common Entrance Test for Private Educational Institutions in Tamil Nadu, seeking permission to have their own admission procedure. That petition was dismissed by the said Committee on 12.07.2005. On the application filed by the first respondent Institution in I.A.No.6 of 2005 in W.P.(C).No.261 of 2003, praying for an order of stay of the Committee's order dated 12.07.2005, the Supreme Court in the order dated 25.07.2005, while granting stay has permitted the first respondent Institution to conduct admission for the year 2005-2006 in the same manner as it was done in 2004-2005 as follows:
" Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and pending decision by the Constitution Bench in S.L.P.(C).No.9932 of 2004 and connected matters, we stay the operation of the order of the Committee dated 12th July, 2005 and permit the applicant-College to conduct the admissions in the same manner in which it was conducted in the Last academic year i.e.2004-2005."
26. With the disposal of all the cases in the recent judgement of the Supreme Court in P.A.Inamdhar's case, the applications and the Writ Petitions have got merged. Therefore, the Institution has moved this Court by filing W.P.37245 of 2005 and prayed for an order of stay of the Committee's order dated 12.07.2005 and this Court by order dated 18.11.2005 in WPMP.No.39877 of 2005 in W.P.No.37245 of 2005, has granted an order of interim stay. In the mean time, for the year 2006-2007, when an application was made before the Committee, the Committee, after elaborate enquiry, has passed orders on 10.06.2006, accepting the procedure of admission followed by the Institution, however, rejecting the reservation of six seats for admission of staff of the Institution, against which the Institution has filed W.P.No.18384 of 2006.
27. In this regard, it is relevant to point out the order of the Permanent Committee for Common Entrance Test for Private Educational Institutions dated 10.06.2006, which reads as follows:
" For the above reasons we hold that except for clause(b) of para 21 of the representation, the procedure for admission seems to be fair and all the seats are to be filled up by common entrance test and from the brochure, it is seen that is transparent. The fee fixed by the institution also seems to be non exploitative and to a certain extent much less than what the Government has fixed. That condition also satisfies in this case.
6 Seats which are now reserved for children of staff of Christian Medical College will have to be distributed among candidates by open merit quota or open quota of Christian minority candidates. There can be no reservation for members of staff of the college.
The fact that the college has been following its own admission procedure ever since 1948 is not a matter of dispute. It is true that from 1993 onwards there was litigation and on the basis of interim orders, the college was allowed to follow its own procedure by the Apex Court.
As per the orders of the Supreme Court, the college was also submitting the statements explaining the basis on which admissions are made. The same was not questioned by the State till date. It is true that these interim orders were obtained at a time when no objection was filed by the State. But that cannot be an answer to say that admissions so far made is neither fair, transparent or non exploitative.
The special feature which have already extracted also shows that this institution is committed to certain ideals. It is only proper on our part to take note of the special survey conducted by India Today - AC Nielsen - ORG - MARG survey of colleges published in India Today issue dated 5.6.2006. About the applicant college, it is stated thus "At CMC, Vellore quality education is a given. With a unique spread of courses, the institute has won accolades for its community health and development programmes, which cover lakhs among the local population. The college is also involved in epidemiological studies and has recently tied up with the Department of Biotechnology to promote translational research in stem cells. In many ways, CMC is only living up to its motto: "Not to be Ministered unto, but to Minister".
Even though Committee is not bound to accept the statement, that does not prevent us to take note of the reputation of the college and its commitment. We find that during the year 2002 CMC, Vellore ranked first among all the medical institutions in India and in the year 2006, it has got 2nd rank.
Apart from all the above facts, it is also evident that candidates who pass the graduation course will have to serve at place where more medical facilities are needed. They are asked to serve in rural areas. In case the candidate fails to do so, he has to face contain serious consequences. The readiness of the candidate to serve the needy is a matter which is taken into consideration by the institutions while considering merit. What the institution does is a team or a missionary work.
Taking into consideration the above facts and special features, we are of the view that permission could be granted to CMC, Vellore to have their own admission procedure subject to what is stated above. We further direct that immediately after the admissions are over, the college has to submit to the Committee and the Directors of Medical Education the following particulars.
1. Copies of total number of applications received for common entrance test and admission.
2. Rank list of all the candidates along with the marks obtained in eligibility qualification examination and CET with roll Nos.in both examination.
3. Admission list of all candidates with their roll No.in qualifying examination and CET along with all supporting documents submitted by the candidates at the time of admission.
4. Such other particulars which the Committee may ask for should also be
submitted."
28. Therefore, the entire analysis of the indisputable facts and the consecutive orders of the Apex court in permitting the Institution to proceed with its procedure as narrated by the Permanent Committee constituted by the State Government itself shows as a standing testimony and approval by the Apex Court for the procedure followed by the Institution in the matter of admission to MBBS course in these years. While so, the power of judicial review of this Court in this regard should be limited in the interest of maintaining judicial discipline. However, since the above points are raised in these appeals, we would proceed to answer the same keeping in mind the consistent approval of the manner of selection made by the Institution in these years by the highest Court in the country.
29. In respect of the process of selection, one of the main points raised by the learned senior counsel for the appellants is that, the conversion of marks into a grading system under Stanine grading is not transparent and therefore it cannot be said that the selection based on the said method should be deemed to be on merit basis. Regarding this process, it is relevant to point out that the first respondent Institution conducts All India Common Entrance examination on 5 papers, viz., Physics, Chemistry, Biology, General ability and Speed and Accuracy with each paper having 60 multiple choice objective questions that carry one mark each with a total of 60 marks per paper and a total of 300 marks for the five papers together.
30. It is seen that each year new questions are invited from teachers in High Schools/Colleges in different parts of the country and are added to the question bank maintained by the first respondent Institution and the questions which are used are deleted and the papers for each year are newly formulated with a balance of evaluated questions from earlier years and new questions. When the admission process starts by December of the previous year, the question papers are prepared and kept under the safe custody. Optical Mark Readable (OMR) answer sheets are also obtained, each sheet scanned to ensure that no additional markings are present, and then sealed by the Registrar and the said process is completed in the middle of April.
31. The All India Entrance Examination, was held on 26th May, 2006 for the year 2006-2007 and the process of valuation commenced. As stated by the first respondent Institution, the marks obtained in each of the 5 papers were divided statistically into nine equal bands. Candidates in the highest 4 percentile graded as A, the next 7 percentile as B+ and so on till the last or 9th Grade is U, the lowest 4 percentile. This banding is done by a computer program. Thereafter, the process of grading starts, where the highest mark obtained by a candidate in the subject is taken as 100 percent in working out the percentiles. The highest mark in Biology in 2006 was 54/60, the lowest marks in Grade A-47.2/60, and the highest mark in Grade B+ 47.0/60.
32. It was, at this stage, the marks in individual papers are converted to grades and there is no overlap of marks at the border between two grades when candidates are ranked in descending order according to the marks secured by them in each subject. The lowest mark in Stanine Grade A was 47.0 and the highest mark in Stanine Grade B+ was 46.8.
The concept of Stanine Grade is as follows:
Stanine Grade 1 1 (A) - 4% Very superior
2 (B+) - 7% Superior
3 (B) - 11% Considerabl