The writ petitioner challenges a portion of the prospectus issued by the respondents 1 to 3 for admission to MBBS/BDS for academic session 2009-2010, that is, paras 1 and 2 of Appendix III and also for direction to the respondents to consider the academic achievements among the candidates falling under each category of sports or in the alternative to take into account the achievement in all the tournaments during the years 2005 to 2009 and make selection.
2. The said Appendix III relates to the selection of candidates under quota for eminent sports persons. The portions of the said Appendix impugned are clauses 1 and 2 which are as follows: 1. The purpose of this quota is to recognize and give weightage to the sports eminence of the candidates and hence marks for sports achievements alone will be considered in ranking the candidates. The candidates are expected to continue good performance in sports, even after selection.
2. The Highest achievement of the candidate in only one annual tournament in the sports disciplines in a year will be considered for awarding marks.
3. The petitioner, who belongs to Backward Class Community, has developed her skill in swimming and has participated in the State level, Zonal Level and National level sports and has won 114 medals in all levels during the past 4 years. It is stated that the petitioner has secured first position and won 48 gold medals at the Divisional, Zonal, State and National levels, besides obtaining second position and secured 37 silver medals in the above said levels. She has also secured third position and 17 bronze medals having participated in number of national tournaments. She has passed in Plus Two examinations under CBSE pattern during March/April, 2009 and secured the following marks in science subjects: Biology ... 95/100 Chemistry ... 95/100 Physics ... 93/100 She was able to secure those marks in spite of her concentration in swimming activities. She has applied for admission to First Year MBBS Course for the year 2009-10. Being an eminent sports person, she is aggrieved by the said two clauses in Appendix III which enable the selection authorities to take achievements in sports alone irrespective of qualifying marks and even among the achievements in sports only one annual tournament in the discipline would be considered for awarding marks for four years preceding 2009.
4. Six tables given in the Appendix III to the prospectus relate to marks for International achievements, marks for recognised National achievements, marks for recognised South Zone achievements, marks for recognised State Championship, marks for recognised State Level achievements and marks for Divisional Level achievements. According to the petitioner, such division is illegal. The clause staying that among them, only one highest achievement of one annual tournament should be taken into consideration is also irrational. The petitioner, though was shocked by the said provision, applied for first year MBBS course both under Open category and under eminent sportsmen, indicating her achievements in each of the four years preceding 2009 apart from setting out her marks in the academic examinations.
5. She has stated that she secured one gold medal in 2007-08, two silver medals during 2006-07 and 2008-09 and one bronze medal in 2005-06. Therefore, as per the other terms of the prospectus if the achievements of the petitioner in four years are taken into consideration, she would be entitled for 7195 marks, however, if the impugned provisions are applied, that is, if only one annual tournament is taken into account, she would be getting only 600 marks. If the tournaments for four preceding years are taken into consideration, she would be selected surely under the quota, eminent sportsmen category. In these circumstances, the said impugned portion of the prospectus is challenged on various legal grounds including that the eminence at all levels, viz., International, National, Zonal, Divisional levels should be taken into consideration altogether and among such persons, the persons with higher marks in academic examinations alone are entitled for selection, as per the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Asif Hameed vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir [(1989) Supp (2) SCC 364] and therefore, the impugned provision is violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even if the first impugned clause is acceptable, the second clause is irrational since even in respect of eminent sports persons only one tournament is taken into consideration for awarding marks. According to the petitioner, if one tournament is taken into consideration, it would be irrational in not taking into account the number of achievements by a candidate for the past four years and restricting it to only one tournament which is the highest achievement. Such concept would result in a person with lesser sports achievements getting selected. Taking into consideration only the participation in International tournaments and marks awarded therein is grossly arbitrary since the same may result in denial of seat to participation in National and State level sportsmen who secured distinction and gold or silver medals.
6. The fourth respondent, the Common Selection Committee for Sports, Anna University, who was subsequently impleaded, has filed a counter affidavit. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the Government of Tamil Nadu has constituted a Common Committee by the Government of Tamil Nadu vide G.O.(ID).No.76 dated 3.4.2009. It is stated that as per clause 42 of the prospectus special categories are mentioned and its sub-clause (iii) enables three persons to be selected for MBBS course from eminent sports persons. It is also stated that under the Appendix III to the prospectus which speaks about the methodology of selection among eminent sports persons, six tables are given classifying the achievements into gold, silver and bronze medals in International, National, State and Zonal levels and that the achievements can be taken only on respect of one annual tournaments among them during preceding four years, i.e., 1.6.2005 to 31.5.2009.
(a) It is stated that the petitioner has been awarded 600 marks in the eminent sportsmen category and placed at 5th place in overall rank list. The first person in the list, Agnishwar.J was awarded 825 marks, opted for Engineering course even though he was eligible for a medical seat and therefore, the petitioner has been placed in 4th rank in the rank list under the eminent sportsmen category. The particulars of five candidates including the petitioner at 5th place, as given in the counter affidavit, are as follows: Sl.No.
Application No. Name Total Rank
1. 516 AGNISHWAR J.
2. 54 KARTHIK B.
3. 282 ABINAYAA V.
4. 523 PADMAJA S.
5. 294 PRAVEENA DEVI B.
(b). It is stated that in respect of third respondent Abinayaa V, since she was able to produce the certificate for sports on the last date for submission of application to medical course i.e., on 17.6.2009, she was given 650 marks for medical course and since the last date for submission of application to engineering course was 31.5.2009 and she could not produce the said certificate within the said date, she was awarded only 525 marks for engineering course and therefore, she was considered for medical admission, being the 4th person in the above list. It is stated that three persons were already granted seats and hence, the petitioner is not entitled to medical seat.
(c). It is denied that there has been deviation in the prospectus from the previous year. According to the said respondent, the practice has been in existence from 2003 onwards. It is stated that awarding of marks for the highest achievements in a particular year is a rational one and it is essential for the purpose of choosing eminent sports persons from several hundreds of applications. Since the number of achievements conducted by the organising bodies vary from one discipline to another discipline of sports, taking all achievements in the years in respect of each candidate will prevent the candidates from taking part in a particular sports activity which is not frequently done and therefore, it is the case of the 4th respondent that the method is not irrational.
7. In the additional counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent it is stated that in respect of some sports activities, there are inherent possibilities of winning several medals while in some other sports it is not possible and for example, the eminent persons in swimming can obtain medals in various categories like butterfly, free style, back-stoke etc. in addition to different sub-categories like, 50 meter free style, 100 meter free style, etc. whereas a person participating in basket ball can get one medal in the given sports meet. In the said counter affidavit, the particulars are given to show that in some sports disciplines number of medals are possible to win whereas in some other sports disciplines it is not, and the said particulars are as follows: Sl.No.
Sports Disciplines where opportunity to win multiple medals in a given event. Sports disciplines where only one medal could be achieved in a given event.
1. Athletics Atya Patya
2. Badminton Ball Badminton
3. Body Building Baseball
4. Boxing Basketball
5. Carrom Beach Volleyball
6. Cycling Billiards and Snookers
7. Fencing Chess
8. Gymnastics Cricket
9. Judo Football
10. Karate-Do Golf
11. Malkhamb Handball
12. Motor Sports Hockey
13. Power lifting Kabaddi
14. Roller Skating Kho-Kho
15. Rowing Korf Ball
16. Sailing Net Ball
17. Shooting Rugby
18. Silambam Sepak Takraw
19. Squash Soft Ball
20. Swimming Throw Ball
21. Table Tennis Volleyball
22. Taek-Won-Do Wushu
23. Tennikot
24. Tennis
25. Triathlon
26. Weightlifting
27. Wrestling
28. Yachting
29. Yogasanas It is also stated that in respect of some of sports disciplines events are organised at the State and National levels frequently and in some other disciplines due to absence of frequent sports events, it may not be possible for sports persons to participate and only considering all those aspects, the said clauses have been included.
8. The 5th respondent, S.Padmaja, who was in third place in the list of selected candidates under eminent sportsmen category has been impleaded as a party.
9. Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner while fairly submitting that another learned Single Judge of this Court has held that when the excellence in sports activities has been taken into consideration by which a candidate is found eligible, there is no question of including the academic marks for the purpose of making selection and the said judgment has been reported in Minor S.Sunayana vs. The State of Tamil Nadu & Others [2004 WLR 228], would submit that in that case the judgment relied upon by the learned Judge viz., the judgment in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [AIR 1987 WLR 91] was taken to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [{1987) Supp. SCC 329] held that in the absence of guidelines to decide about the eminence in sports, the academic excellence should be taken into consideration.
9(a). It is his submission that in the absence of proper guidelines for selecting candidates from eminent sports persons, the selection should be made on the basis of the performance in the qualifying examinations, in addition to the marks granted under sports category. He would submit that ultimately the selection is to medical course which must be kept in mind while making such regulations. It is his submission that as far as the second clause in Appendix III is concerned, if the yardstick is taken as valid, it would mean that an eminent sports person who is able to participate a series of sports activities and secure many medals such as, gold, silver and bronze which alone should be given credence, will be relegated to back position, while a person participating in a very rare sports with low competition and getting gold medal will be getting first position. According to him, this would only discourage the persons who participate in many sports activities and cannot be the idea behind the selection of candidates under eminent sports categories. It is his submission that while the 5th respondent who has been selected got 164/200 marks in academic examinations in CBSE pattern and the petitioner got 189/200 marks and if that is taken into account, the petitioner would get a chance of selection.
10. On the other hand, it is the contention of Mr.Manisundaragopal, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent that the object of choosing eminent sports persons for medical admission is only to find out the real eminent sports persons to be accommodated in MBBS course and in choosing such persons, the guidelines have been prescribed by way of giving marks in various tables, which, according to him, are not arbitrary. He would submit that the second clause of Appendix III which is impugned, really takes care of eminent sports persons if such sports persons get gold medal in any one of four years in International/ National level and he/she would get the highest marks, either 500 or 300. He would submit that if the academic marks can be taken into consideration, it will only be in cases where two persons of sports excellence get equal marks with a view to decide one among them, by placing reliance on the same judgment relied upon by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [(1987) Supp.(2) SCC 329].
11. The 5th respondent who was served and has appeared through counsel has not chosen to file counter affidavit.
12. The petitioner in the typed-set of papers has given the details of sports certificates enclosed showing that she has participated in XXXI National Sports Festival for Women in October, 2005 in 100 mts. breast-stroke, apart from her participation at the National level in January, 2007 in 50 mts. breast-stroke and in January, 2009 in 4x100 mts. free style relay. For the said participation, as per the impugned provisions under Appendix III, she was given 600 marks. On the other hand, she has given sports performance certificates from 1.6.2005 to January 2009 at various State level, National level, South Zone level, Divisional level, etc. numbering to 114 events and on that basis, if marks are awarded as per Appendix III to the prospectus, according to her, she would be entitled for 7195 marks. No doubt, it shows that she has been continuously participating in sports activities. However, she has chosen to challenge clause 1 of Appendix III on the ground that in academic examinations she has secured 189/200 marks while the 5th respondent has secured 164/200 marks.
13. A similar provision which was available in the prospectus for admission to medical course for the academic year 2003-04 was questioned before this Court. In the year 2003-04, Appendix III was relating to selection of candidates among eminent sports persons in the year 2003. This Court considered the clause in S.Sunayana vs. The State of Tamil Nadu & Others [2004 WLR 228] and held as follows:
Appendix III Selection of Candidates under Quota for Eminent Sports Persons 2003.
1. As the purpose of this quota is to recognise and give weightage to the sports eminence of the candidate, sports mark alone will be considered in ranking the candidate. The candidate is expected to show performance in sports, if selected.
2. Selection of the candidates will be based on the marks obtained by the candidates following the guidelines given in the table below:
(A) Marks for (each) Participation:
Category International (Representing Nation) National (Representing State) Individual 20 10 Team 10 5 (B) Marks for (each) achievement:
International (Representing Nation) National (Representing State) State (Representing Revenue District) Category Gold Silver Bronze Gold Silver Bronze Gold Silver Bronze Individual 60 40 20 40 27 13 27 18 9 Team 30 20 10 20 13 7 13 9 5 Other Recognised National/State Level Sports Meet:
(C) Marks for (each) achievement:
Sl.No.
Sponsor Category Gold Silver Bronze
1. School Games Federation of India (SGFI) (National Level) Individual Team 30 15 20 10 10 5
2. All India Rural Sports (National Level) Individual Team 30 15 20 10 10 5
3. Bharathiyar Day Sports (State) Individual Team 20 10 13 7
-
4. Republic Day Sports Meet (State Level) Individual Team 20 10 13 7 7 4 (D) Marks for over all Championship:
Category International (Representing Nation) National (Representing State) State (Representing Revenue District) Championship 30 25 20
14. In that case, a contention was raised relying upon the judgment in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [AIR 1987 WLR 91] which was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [1987 Supp.SCC 329] wherein the clause impugned was, Annexure I-(iii) to prospectus for admission for academic year 1986-87 relating to eminent sports persons which is as follows:
Annexure -I
(iii) Eminent Sportsman Special Category In the sub-column (iii) under the Caption Eminent Sportsman, there are three Categories, namely, (a) Participation at International Level the candidate being sponsored by national body; (b) Participation at National level the candidate being sponsored by a State body or University; (c) Participation at State level the candidate being sponsored by Zonal or District Association. When such contention was made relying upon the judgment of the year 1987 based on the prospectus of the year 1986-87 to question the relevant prospectus for the year 2003-04 as stated above, D.Murugesan,J. by comparing the said two prospectus, held as follows:
7. From the above, it is seen that specific regulations, guidelines are prescribed for awarding marks to the participation, achievements and overall championship. When the method for award of marks is provided and the guidelines prescribed, the judgements relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case. As already pointed out, the said judgment was rendered in a case where no guidelines for warding marks to judge the comparative eminence in sports were prescribed.
8. The Government being the funding agency, is entitled to identify the source for admission. Reservation for special category is made under
Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India and is Horizontal Reservation. Even while filling the seats earmarked as Horizontal Reservation social reservation under
Article 15(1) is followed only when such reservation is Compartmentalised Horizontal Reservation and not Overall Horizontal Reservation. Such Reservation for eminent Sports Persons is only to recognise the excellence/achievements in sports and to encourage sports and games among students. Once the eligibility for admission under Sports Category is determined, the selection and admission shall be based on the marks obtained for the excellence in sports only. There cannot be a further classification on the basis of academic marks for selection and admission. Hence, the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner deserve to be rejected.
15. A reference to the prospectus of the year 2003-04 shows that under the eminent sportsmen category, marks which are given for participation in International/National/State level with achievements in gold, silver and bronze, for each of the achievements have been directed to be included. The word, 'each' either in respect of participation or achievement shows that the marks were to be given to the candidates in respect of participation and achievement in every participation. Therefore, there was certainly no possibility of any arbitrariness in choosing persons among eminent sports persons and in that context, it was held that there was no scope for arbitrariness and the selection is within the pure guidelines intended to select the excellent sportsmen among the candidates. The learned Judge (D.Murugesan,J.) has also referred to the earlier prospects of the year 1986-87 elicited above wherein there was absolutely no guidelines for choosing the persons and in those circumstances it was held in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [1987 WLR 91] by S.Mohan,J.(as he then was) as follows:
9. ..... Therefore by and large I take it that the policy of reservation seems to be to encourage sports and by classifying it as eminent sportsmen, as otherwise there will be hundreds of persons claiming as sportsmen. Therefore, this is an accent on eminence. In order to show some distinction with regard to the individual achievements, three categorisation as International level, National level and State level have been made. Beyond that I see absolutely no scope for importing the concept of deciding eminence inter se in a particular category. ....
16. The Supreme Court, on appeal, against the said judgment in Khalid Hussain vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Health Department, Madras and others [1987 Supp.SCC 329] again confirmed that in the absence of guidelines for selection among the eligible candidates falling under the eminent sports persons, the comparative merit has to be adjudged by academic excellence, taking into account the marks obtained in the qualifying examinations. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Supreme Court is as follows:
5. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner does not take note of the fact that the decision in P.Sabitha's case proceeded on an interpretation of a provision for reservation of seats for the category 'eminent sportsmen' which was altogether different. The importance of the decision in P.Sabitha's case lies only on the view that a provision for reservation of seats in professional courses for sportsmen was not irrational or arbitrary but had reasonable nexus to the object sought to be achieved in public interest, namely, promotion of sports. In the prospectus for the year 1986-87, the State Government has brought about a change. The provision, as it now stands, provides for a rule of preference. Category (iii) like categories (i) and (ii) must have secured 50 per cent aggregate marks in science subjects in the qualifying examination. The rule nowhere provides for any determination of comparative eminence. All that the rule does is to lay down a rule of preference. A candidate who had participated at International level would exclude a candidate participating at National level and a person who had participated at National level would exclude a person participating at State level. It has to be pointed out that the rule itself does not provide for determination of comparative eminence as between different candidates falling within the same class but as between sportsmen who have participated at International level, National level and State level. It only provides for the rule of exclusion of one by the other. There are no guidelines provided by which comparative eminence can be judged as between candidates belonging to the same class e.g. at National level, as here. Nor does it provide for any guidelines by which the choice has to be made as between the candidates who have excelled in a particular field of sports e.g. aquatics. The real difficulty arises when there are more than one candidate who have excelled in their respective fields of sports e.g. cricket, football, hockey etc. and the number of seats reserved are less than the candidates found eligible. All of them being more or less equal, the best method is to go by marks obtained at the qualifying examination. In such a case, the selection must necessarily depends upon their academic merits. Even in P.Sabitha's case the court realised the difficulty to lay down any guidelines for adjudging comparative eminence between sportsmen falling within the same class and it was said that when candidates are shown to have attained equal proficiency in sports, then their academic superiority can be pressed into service as a titling factor in their favour.
6. In the absence of any guidelines for purposes of selection, the adjudging of comparative merits among the eligible candidates falling under the category 'eminent sportsmen' would necessarily introduce, as the learned Chief Justice observed, an element of subjectivity which would introduce arbitrariness in the selection of candidates because it would be left to the discretion of the executive in making the choice. In the absence of any guidelines, there is nothing for the Selection Committee to fall back upon except the marks obtained by the candidates at the qualifying examination. The argument of the learned counsel obviously based on the observations in P.Sabitha's case that the proper test to adopt in the matter of selection of candidates for admission to the MBBS course belonging to the category 'eminent sportsmen' was pre-eminence in sports and not academic excellence, cannot be accepted. That test cannot obviously be applied in interpreting the present rule.
17. As far as the present prospectus of the year 2009-10 is concerned, in respect of clause-1, which is impugned, the same is to be read along with the entire clause in Appendix III wherein marks are awarded in the following manner:
APPENDIX - III SELECTION OF CANDIDATES UNDER QUOTA FOR EMINENT SPORTS PERSONS
1. The purpose of this quota is to recognize and give weightage to the sports eminence of the candidates and hence marks for sports achievements alone will be considered in ranking the candidates. The candidates are expected to continue good performance in sports, even after selection.
2. The Highest achievement of the candidate in only one annual tournament in the sports disciplines in a year will be considered for awarding marks.
3. Selection of the candidate will be based on the marks obtained by the candidate, following the guidelines given in the table:
Table (I) Marks for International Achievement Competition Gold Silver Bronze Participation International (Representing India Category - I) 500 450 400 150 International (Representing India Category II) 350 300 250 125 Table (II) Marks for Recognised National Achievement Sl.No.
Competitions Allocation of marks Gold Silver Bronze Participation
1. National Championships Organised by National Federations 175 150 125 40
2. School Games Federation of India (SGFI) Meet (National Level) 175 150 125 40
3. All India Rural Sports Meets (National Level) 175 150 125 40
4. National Sports Festival for Women (National Level) 175 150 125 40
5. National Inter School Competition (National Level) 175 150 125 40 Table (III) Marks for Recognised South Zone Achievement Sl.No.
Competitions Allocation of marks Gold Silver Bronze Participation
1. South Zone Tournaments/Meets Organised by State Associations and Federations.
Table (IV) Marks for Recognised State Championship Sl.No.
Competitions Allocation of marks Gold Silver Bronze Participation
1. South Championship Representing Revenue District Organised by State Associates.
Table (V) Marks for Recognised State Level Achievements Sl.No.
Competitions Allocation of marks Gold Silver Bronze Participation
1. Bharathiar Day Sports Meet (State Level) 55 40 25 10
2. Republic Day Sports Meet (State Level) 55 40 25 10
3. State Inter School Championship (State Level) 55 40 25 10
4. KVS/CBSE National Sports Meet (State Level) 55 40 25 10 Table (VI) Marks for Divisional Level Achievements Sl.No.
Competitions Allocation of marks Gold Silver Bronze Participation
1. Bharathiar Day Sports Meet (Division Level) 45 30 15 5
2. Republic Day Sports Meet (Division Level) 45 30 15 5
3. KVS/Regional/CBSE South Zone Meet (Divisional Level) 45 30 15 5
4. Inter-Divisional Polytechnic Meet (Divisional Level) 45 30 15 5
5. District Inter School Competition (Division Level) 45 30 15 5 Gold(I Position) Silver (II Position) Bronze (III Position)
4.(a) For International Tournaments:
Category I : Olympics, World Cup/World Championship, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, Asian Championships, Junior World Cup/World Championships, Asian Junior Championships, World University Games/Championships,World School Games, Afro Asian Games,South Asian Federation Games and Junior South Asian Federation Games. Category II : All other International tournaments not covered under Category I and wherein not less than six countries had participated.
1.Participation/achievement in International tournaments will be considered only with earlier achievements at National/State Level Tournaments.
2.Only tournaments officially recognised by the Indian Olympic Association/respective official National Federations will be considered for the award of marks (for each year) (1.6.2005 to 31.5.2006, 1.6.2006 to 31.5.2007, 1.6.2007 to 31.5.2008 and 1.6.2008 to 31.5.2009).
3.Participation/Achievements in tournaments, with Form I alone are eligible for marks indicated in the table (I) above.
(b). For National Tournaments:
1.The highest achievement in only one annual tournament, officially recognised as the regular annual championship/tournament by Indian Olympic Association SDAT/SAI/respective official National Federation will be considered (for each year) for the award of marks.
2.Marks will not be awarded for selection trials.
(c). For State Tournaments:
1.The highest achievement in only one annual tournament, officially recognised as the regular annual championship/tournament by SDAT/SAI/respective official State Association will be considered (for each year) for the award of marks.
5. General Conditions:
1.For consideration of candidates seeking admission under the category of eminent sports person, he/she should enclose attested photo copies of participation certificates and the Forms issued by the relevant sports authorities, along with the application.
2.Participation/achievements from 01.06.2005 to 31.05.2009 (1.6.2005 to 31.5.2006, 1.6.2006 to 31.5.2007, 1.6.2007 to 31.5.2008 and 1.6.2008 to 31.5.2009) in sports/games shown in the list alone will be taken into account. National/State Level Championships/Tournaments conducted by organisations recognised by Indian Olympic Association/Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu (SDAT) / Tamil Nadu Olympic Association (TNOA) alone will be considered for award of marks. (Recognition should be relevant to the year concerned).
3.The relevant attested copies of certificates issued by the appropriate authorities as detailed below are to be submitted along with the application. Category Competent Authority Form/Certificate International (Representing Nation) President / Secretary of the National Sports Federation (recognised by IOA) Form I National (Representing State) Member Secretary, SDAT/Secretary of the State Association (recognised by SDAT/TNOA) Form II National (Representing State) Chief Inspector of Physical Education for National School Games Competitions. Form IV School Games Federation of India (SGFI) (National Level) President/ Hon.Gen.Secretary, SGFI Certificates National Inter School Competition (National Level) Executive Director/Director -General, Sports Authority of India.
Certificates All India Rural Sports (National Level) Executive Director/Director -General, Sports Authority of India.
Certificates Form II National Sports Festival for Women (National Level) Executive Director/Director -General, Sports Authority of India.
Certificates Form II KVS Nationals (State Level) Commissioner/Joint Commissioner of KVS Certificates CBSE National Sports Meet (State Level) A.E.O. Sports/Secretary,CBSE Certificates Bharathiar Day Sports Meet (State Level) Regional Inspector of Physical Education and Chief Inspector of Physical Education. Certificates Republic Day Sports Meet (State Level) Regional Inspector of Physical Education and Chief Inspector of Physical Education. Certificates State Inter School Competitions (State Level) Member Secretary, Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu.
Certificates Bharathiar Day Sports Meet (Divisional Level) Regional Inspector of Physical Education and Chief Inspector of Physical Education. Certificates Republic Day Sports Meet (Divisional Level) Regional Inspector of Physical Education and Chief Inspector of Physical Education. Certificates KVS Regional Level (Divisional Level) Assistant Commissioner of KVS Certificates CBSE South Zone Sports Meet (Divisional Level) A.E.O. Sports/Secretary, CBSE Certificates Inter-Divisional Polytechnic Meet (Divisional Level) Director of Technical Education.
Certificates District Inter School Competitions (Divisional Level) District Sports Officer Certificates These certificates are not valid unless signed personally in ink by the authorities mentioned above.
4. Open/Invitational Tournaments of any kind will not be considered.
5. For Tennis, the achievements of top three players by his/her position in the ranking list published by AITA/TNTA based on the ranking rules and the final rankings of previous four years, will be awarded marks for achievements and participation (necessary forms from the associations are to be enclosed).
6. For Cricket, the annual official championship tournaments conducted within the country under the auspices of TNCA/BCCI at District/State/National level alone will be taken into consideration that year.
7. The participation/achievements of candidates with nativity in Tamil Nadu who represented Tamil Nadu alone are eligible for marks under National Category.
8. Only Tamil Nadu candidates are eligible to apply for admission under Sports Quota and only the candidates who have studied KVS/CBSE schools within Tamil Nadu will be eligible for marks.
9. A Common Committee for Engineering and Medicine constituted for this purpose will rank the candidates based on the marks assigned to the certificates enclosed along with the application.
10. All the achievement certificates are to be supported necessarily by the relevant participation certificates and appropriate forms.
11. No further enclosures or certificates under any circumstances will be entertained after the date for submission of completed application form.
12. Required number of candidates will be called to appear for an interview before the Common Committee for Engineering/Medicine for verification of the Originals, followed by counselling after ranking.
13. If any candidate fails to produce the requisite Original Certificates/Forms, his/her place will be allotted to the candidate next in rank and so on. The consequential vacancy at the end of the rank list will be filled up from among the additional candidates according to their ranks.
14. Selected candidates will be counseled and allotment of branches and colleges earmarked for this quota will be based on the ranking before the start of the main counselling.
15. A candidate can utilise the sports quota only once for Engineering/Medicine.
SPORTS QUOTA 2009 LIST OF SPORTS DISCIPLINES 1 Athletics 2 Atya Patya 3 Badminton 4 Ball Badminton 5 Baseball 6 Basketball 7 Beach Volleyball 8 Billiards and Snookers 9 Body Building 10 Boxing 11 Carrom 12 Chess 13 Cricket 14 Cycling 15 Fencing 16 Football 17 Golf 18 Gymnastics 19 Handball 20 Hockey 21 Judo 22 Kabadi 23 Karate-Do 24 Kho-Kho 25 Korf Ball 26 Mallakham 27 Motor Sports 28 Netball 29 Powerlifting 30 Roller Skating 31 Rowing 32 Rugby 33 Sailling 34 Sepak Takraw 35 Shooting 36 Silambam 37 Soft Ball 38 Squash Rackets 39 Swimming 40 Table Tennis 41 Taek-won-do 42 Tennikoit 43 Tennis 44 Throwball 45 Traithlon 46 Volleyball 47 Weightlifting 48 Wrestling 49 Wushu 50 Yachting 51 Yogasanas
18. In view of the above said guidelines with minute details in awarding marks, I do not see any reason to accept the contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that clause-1 of Appendix III should be interfered with. Inasmuch as the guidelines in respect of choosing eminent sports persons for admission to first year MBBS course are almost exhaustive, there is no necessity to look into the academic excellence when a candidate comes within the zone of consideration under the eminent sportsmen category.
19. As far as clause-2 of Appendix III is concerned, it provides for the consideration of achievement marks obtained in only one tournament in a year for the last four years starting from June, 2005, as it is seen in clause 42(iii) of the prospectus which is as follows: 42. SPECIAL CATEGORIES
(i) and (ii) xxxx
(iii) SEATS RESERVED FOR EMINENT SPORTS PERSON NO.OF SEATS RESERVED IN M.B.B.S. - 3 Selection will be done by the Common Committee constituted for this purpose at Anna University, Chennai. The mode of selection will be made as per the guidelines given in Appendix-III. The candidates should submit the filled-in Special Category application along with two set of attested Xerox copies of certificates and testimonials of sports along with common application form (General Category) in the office of the Selection Committee in person on or before the last date prescribed for submission of application. Selection Committee is not responsible for the application sent by Post/Courier for this category. Selection will be made by common committee at Anna University. Decision of the common committee shall be final. The candidates are requested to arrange the certificates as per the serial number starting from June 2005 as given in the Annexure VIII and submit along with the application in person. All the particulars are to be filled up as per the guidelines given in the Annexure. The other eligibility conditions for admission to MBBS course will be applicable as in the case of General Category. The same cannot be considered to be equivalent to that of the prospectus of the year 2003-04 as stated above wherein the relevant clause in the prospectus made it very clear that marks obtained in each participation and achievement must be taken into consideration. It is that aspect of the term, 'each' has been taken away in the present prospectus of the year 2009-10 by including the second impugned clause in the Appendix III stating that marks of only one achievement in a year will be taken into consideration. This certainly amounts to liquidating the broad guideline which has been otherwise given in the Appendix III. Therefore, it is true that there is a deviation in selection made from the year 2004-05 by restricting to anyone of annual tournaments in a sports discipline in a year which cannot be said to be a method of selecting real sports eminent persons among the eligible candidates. When the candidates under the eminent sportsmen category are categorised for the purpose of filling up of limited number of seats, a prudent method should be followed.
20. As stated above, in the year 1986-87 when there were no proper guidelines for the purpose of selecting candidates under the eminent sports persons, but there were guidelines only in respect of International/National/State level participation, it was held by the Apex Court confirming the judgment of this Court that the academic excellence should be taken into consideration. But, in the changed scenario, especially in the academic year 2005-06 when guidelines have become exhaustive, there is no necessity to look into the academic excellence, since the guidelines are sufficient to choose the limited number of candidates among them by treating them as eminent persons. By introducing a restriction as stated above in clause-2 of Appendix III, certainly a person who has participated in many events in a particular year and won medals or otherwise is considered as less eminent than a person who participated only one tournament in a year and that cannot be a prudent method for the purpose of selecting candidates among the eminent sports persons.
21. It cannot be said that participation in many events in a year is not a criterion for deciding eminent sports persons. For example, in a year even when a candidate participated in sports events and obtained a gold medal and in the same year, he participated in another event and obtained a silver medal, the impugned clause-2 enables the selection committee to take the mark only in respect of gold medal being the highest achievement of the year and the marks to which he is eligible by having got silver medal is not included, which was not the criterion in 2004-05 as the word, 'each' significantly enabled the candidates to have the marks obtained in respect of each of the competitions for the purpose of deciding the candidates among the eminent sports persons.
22. There is one another danger in applying this condition. It is true that in respect of some of the sports like, swimming, foot ball, hockey, etc. there is possibility for the sportsmen to participate in the events very often conducted but in respect of some other sports as given in the list in the prospectus which are not even known to many people like, mallakhamb, taek-won-do, wushu, etc. the events may not take place frequently and the participants may be very small in number and in such case, if a candidate participating in a particular year gets a gold medal, applying the clause-2, he would be given the highest marks and selected by treating him as eminent sports person even though he has not participated in sports events consistently. Further, in many sports like, cricket, hockey, volley ball, foot ball, etc. there are many participants and in addition to the required number of participants to pay, the authorities have selected few more participants in wait list as persons expected to participate at any time during the match and such participants may have the chance of losing their marks by applying the said clause-2 of Appendix III.
23. It is true that there is a fool-proof method to select the candidates among the eminent sports persons called, absolute criterion. There are bound to be some fall-outs, but taking the over all situation, it can be stated without any fear of contradiction which was happened from 2004-05 till 2008-09, that the inclusion of marks for each participation alone should a justifiable criterion for the purpose of deciding the persons eligible to be selected the persons among the eminent persons. Even after choosing such method, if two candidates obtain same marks, then certainly the selection committee has to go to the academic excellence to decide one among the said two. Therefore, except in such a contingency, in other circumstances, when a candidate obtains the required academic qualifications and comes within the eligibility criteria for consideration, thereafter, it is the sports activities and eminence in the same as explained exhaustively in Appendix III have to be taken into consideration. While taking the same into consideration, the marks obtained in each of the participation have to be taken into consideration which alone can give a proper and justifiable process of selection among the eminent sports persons for the bare minimum three seats which are available for MBBS course every year.
24. In the counter filed by the fourth respondent in paragraph 13 it is stated as under:
13. It is respectfully submitted that since the number of tournaments and competitions conducted by the organising bodies vary from sports discipline to sports discipline it would amount to treating unequal as equals and would violate Art.14 if all the achievements in a particular year are taken into consideration for the purpose of awarding marks and therefore, those stipulation in the prospectus that only one highest achievement in a year would be taken into consideration is legal and is in accordance with the Constitution and principles. This itself raises an important issue about the sports discipline and number of tournaments and it is true that there are more occasions in some sports events for the persons to participate every year which may not be possible for the candidates who are expertise in any other sports. But, that is not a ground to restrict the number of participations made by an individual sports person which would otherwise result in discouraging persons who have frequently participated in the sports events and the same is in violation of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
25. Among the five candidates who have been placed as rank candidates, the petitioner is the 5th candidate, while the first candidate Agnishwar J. opted for engineering course, between the 4th candidate Padmaja S. and the petitioner herein, the difference in marks is 25. The 4th respondent has given the sports marks details about the five candidates as follows: SPORTS MARKS DETAILS 2009-2010 MBBS/BDS Sl.No.
Appln.No.
Name 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Total Marks
1. 516 Agnishwar J.
Achievement Medal Sports Mark National Gold 175 Inter-national Category- II Participation 125 International Category II Gold 350 National Gold 175 825
2. 54 Karthik B.
Achievement Medal Sports Mark National Silver 150 National Bronze 125 National Bronze 125 Inter--national Category II Bronze 250 650
3. 282 Abinayaa V Achievement Medal Sports Mark National Silver 150 National Bronze 125 National Bronze 125 Inter--national Category II Bronze 250 650
4. 523 Padmaja S Achievement Medal Sports Mark National Bronze 125 National Gold 175 National Gold 175 National Silver 150 625
5. 294 Praveena Devi B.
Achievement Medal Sports Mark National Bronze 125 National Silver 150 National Gold 175 National Silver 150 600 But, the 4th respondent has not chosen to state as to the nature of sports participated by each of the candidates. In such circumstances, the selection made by the respondents under the eminent sportsmen category is to be set aside with direction to the selection committee to make fresh selection under the eminent sportsmen category from among the said five candidates by excluding the first candidate who has opted for engineering course.
26. In the result, the writ petition stands partly allowed with the following directions: (1) Clause 1 of Appendix III of the prospectus for MBBS/BDS for the academic 2009-10 is held valid. (2) Clause 2 of Appendix III of the prospectus for MBBS/BDS for the year 2009-10 to the effect that 'the highest achievement of the candidate in only one annual tournament in the sport disciplines in a year will be considered for awarding marks' is set aside with direction to the respondents to work out the process of selection among the 4 candidates viz., (i) Karthik B, application No.54; (ii) Abinayaa V, application No.282; (iii) Padmaja S, application No. 523; and (iv)Praveena Devi B, application No.294, as per this order and select accordingly.
(3). All other clauses in the Appendices including guidelines do not require any interference and are valid.
No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
kh To
1.The Secretary to Government State of Tamil Nadu Health Department Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Medical Education Teynampet, Chennai 600 018.
3.The Secretary Selection Committee Directorate of Medical Education No.163 Periyar E.V.R.Road Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.
4.The Common Committee constituted for the Selection of Eminent Sports Persons at Anna University Chennai