E-Paper
MD/MS admissions: No stay by HC, GMCH, Chandigarh holds first state counselling
The counselling was scheduled for 10 am at the office of the director-principal, however, as a plea challenging changes made by the Chandigarh administration in the admission process was to come up before the high court, hospital authorities waited for the hearing’s outcome
With the Punjab and Haryana high court granting no immediate stay on the process, Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH), Sector 32, held the first state counselling session for MD/MS admissions on Wednesday evening.
The counselling was scheduled for 10 am at the office of the director-principal. However, as a plea challenging changes made by the UT administration in the admission process was to come up before the high court, hospital authorities waited for the hearing’s outcome.
Eventually, the seat allocation process began after 5.30 pm, when Anil Mehta, senior standing counsel of the Chandigarh administration, shared that the high court had allowed the counselling to continue in accordance with the revised process and sequencing, as provided in the prospectus. However, the counselling will be subject to final outcome of the court case.
As per the prospectus, of the total 148 seats, 72 seats are allocated to all-India quota, while the remaining 72 (SC:10, General: 62 and EWS: 4) are earmarked for state quota. State quota is further divided into two categories: IP Pool and the UT Chandigarh Pool, both comprising 36+2 (EWS) seats each.
MBBS graduates of GMCH, Shubham Jund and others, had approached the high court, alleging that UT’s decision to modify the admission process was unilateral and arbitrary, and will severely impact the possibility of Institutional Preference Pool (IP) pool candidates getting a specialty/discipline of their choice.
After complaints of discrimination in seat allocation, on August 4, the UT health secretary had directed GMCH to revise the counselling process and sequencing promptly for MD/MS admissions for the 2023 session to ensure a completely fair and transparent admission process.
As per the order, an IP Pool candidate should firstly be adjusted against the seats of preferred branch available in IP Pool. However, if the preferred branch is not available, then, subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria of UT Pool, the candidate can be considered for the branch of preferred choice under UT Pool.
During the preceding hearing on August 10, the high court had sought a response from the UT administration by August 16.
On Wednesday, UT’s senior standing counsel informed the court that under the revised process and sequencing of counselling, the only change made was that IP Pool candidate will be firstly considered against IP Pool seat, if the desired branch was available in IP Pool.
Earlier the IP Pool candidates were first considered against UT Pool seat even though the desired branch was available in IP Pool that resulted in injustice with candidates having higher NEET-PG rank.
The decision was formally reached by the administration after thorough examination from every possible perspective, based upon due analysis of the empirical data and other relevant factors that were required to be taken into consideration, the court was informed.
