MP high court on Thursday pulled the APDMC for lack of seriousness in holding the DMAT 2015 on September 20, 2015. A division bench of chief justice AM Khanwilkar and justice KK Trivedi said, “We do not want the same thing to happen again.”
The court was hearing a request of the Association of Private Dental and Medical Colleges (APDMC) to hold the test immediately to finish the admission process by September 30, 2015, in accordance with the date fixed by the Supreme Court.
The APDMC today requested the court to modify some technical conditions it had earlier laid.
On the issue, the high court sought a report from database administrator CLM Reddy over feasibility to moderate certain technical conditions. Reddy, ex-deputy director general of NIC, was appointed by the court as database administrator to supervise technical operations of DMAT 2015.
The high court held that “most of the points suggested by the APDMC are of technical nature and will depend on expert opinion on those matters.”
The court directed the APDMC to forward said points to Reddy, “who in turn may give his report about the feasibility of modifying some of the conditions already specified.”
“Reddy will be free to call upon the officials of AFRC or the APDMC if further clarification or discussion on any specific point is required,” the court said.
Furthermore, the court said the petitioners are free to send their suggestions on the APDMC’s demands directly to Reddy via e-mail by September 25.
The HC took on record an explanation filed on affidavit by the APDMC for failure to conduct the DMAT as per the conditions laid down by the court.
In the affidavit, the association denied having violated any of the conditions laid down by the court at any point of time the examination was held while rejecting accusations made in the report of the database administrator.
The association blamed “poor infrastructure of colleges, poor generator facilities and vested interests of some people to sabotage the examination that led to the problems which were beyond the control of the APDMC.”
“The association had no past experience of conducting the online examination and therefore no technical expertise was available with it,” the affidavit read. “The association has to rely and depend on an outside agency approved by the court to conduct the online examination in a fair and transparent manner.”
Further, the APDMC claimed that the “installation of jammers at the examination centres by way of additional safeguard to a very large extent was also responsible for a major technical problem.”