Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: A Division Bench comprising of B.R. Gavai and Bharati. H.Dangre, JJ., allowed a petition filed seeking a transfer from a medical college in Miraj to a college in Mumbai/Thane.

The petitioner was aggrieved by the rejection of her application for transfer from Government Medical College, Miraj to any Government Medical College in Mumbai or Thane. The petitioner sought transfer on the ground that she suffered from Allergic Bronchitis Bronchial Asthma and need to be treated in Mumbai. It was undisputed fact that one seat was vacant in Rajeev Gandhi Medical College, Thane (RGMC). It was also undisputed that she had obtained all the documents (no objection certificates) from concerned authorities. It was contended by the respondent State that the petitioner could not be granted migration as the seat in RGMC was not a clear vacancy as per the information brochure of the State Government since it arose due to the migration of a student from the said seat.

The High Court perused the record and observed that the petitioner had all the required documents necessary under MCI Regulations and also Regulations issued by Vice Chancellor of the University. The Court noted the submission made by the respondent State but only to be rejected. The Court categorically observed, the brochure issued by the State Government at most could be an administrative instruction and could not have an overriding effect over the Regulations framed by MCI which were in nature of subordinate legislation. The Court found that the petitioner had complied with all the technical requirements as per MCI Regulations and the only question left for consideration was whether the transfer was sought by the petitioner on genuine grounds. The High Court was of the opinion that the petitioner had a genuine case for seeking a transfer as she was suffering from an ailment which required proper medical attention. Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the State was directed to approve petitioner’s case for transfer to RGMC, Thane. [Pankti M. Pancholi v.  State of Maharashtra,2018 SCC OnLine Bom 1178, dated 04-05-2018]

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: Considering the pressing need of filling up the huge vacancy in police force, the bench of J.S.Khehar, CJ and Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud, JJ approved the selection process suggested by the States of Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and asked the States to duly comply with the timelines suggested by them for achieving the aforementioned goal.

The State of Uttar Pradesh said that 3200 Sub-Inspector of Police and 30000 Constables, will be recruited each year over four years commencing from the year 2018

The State of Karnataka had provided a detailed plan for filling up the vacancies in the State in the form of the ‘Road Map for filling up the vacancies during the year 2016-17’ and committed to recruit 942 sub-inspectors and 12139 constables by the end of 2019.

The State of Tamil Nadu said that it would fill up the 77 vacancies in the cadre of sub-inspector within 5 months and the 17,589 vacancies for the post of Constable will be filled up by April, 2018.

Regarding the States of West Bengal, Bihar and Jharkhand, who had been issued notice earlier to come up with an action plan, the Court deferred the proceedings to 01.05.2017. The Court also asked the Home Secretaries of the States of Gujarat, Telangana and Rajasthan to to prepare a definite road map for filling up the vacancies of police personnel. [Manish Kumar v. Union of India, WRIT PETITION(C) NO.183/2013, order dated 24.04.2017]