Arguments continue before third judge

The Madras High Court today continued to hear arguments on appeals filed against a single judge order, which was referred to a third judge, after the split verdict of a vacation bench on pleas for fixing norms for according incentive marks to in-service government doctors for admission to post-graduate medical courses in Tamil Nadu.
Justice M Sathyanarayanan, who was appointed as third judge to decide on the matter, heard arguments from senior counsel for petitioners and Additional Advocate General before adjourning to hear the case pending submissions by senior counsel Vijay Narayan for Medical Council of India, to tomorrow.
A division bench, comprising Justice KK Sasidharan and Justice SM Subramniam, had yesterday delivered a split verdict on the writ appeals filed challenging the single judge order upholding the regulation of MCI in awarding incentive marks and reserving 25 per cent of seats to in-service candidates for the PG medical admissions.

Justice Sasidharan held that the methodology adopted by the state for giving weightage marks for in-service candidates was "not in conflict" with the MCI's.
On the other hand, Justice Subramaniam in his separate order quashed some of the clauses of the prospectus issued by the state government, terming them as "inconsistent and repugnant" to the 'Regulation of the Post Graduate Medical Regulation rules 2000" issued by the MCI.
The judge directed the state government to formulate the procedure for admission process in accordance with the MCI 9 and 9(IV) of the MCI regulations.
The vacation bench was specially set up to hear the matter.

The appellants had challenged the single judge's April 17 order upholding the MCI norms that the incentive marks for in-service candidates should be awarded only as per the MCI's Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2000 and not on the basis of the state government's norms.