UPCMET admissions: HC seeks Centre, MCI reply
In his plea, S S Hooda has contended that he had carried out a sting of a UP-based medical college which had allegedly revealed that the institute was admitting students on receipt of payment of Rs 35 lakh.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has sought the response of the Centre and the Medical Council of India (MCI) on a PIL alleging corrupt practices in the admission process for medical colleges in Uttar Pradesh through the UP Combined Medical Entrance Test (UPCMET) of 2015.
A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath issued notice to Department of Health and Family Welfare of the Health Ministry and MCI and sought their responses on the plea which has sought a probe by CBI or any independent agency into the alleged corruption in UP Unaided Medical Colleges Welfare Association which conducted UPCMET-2015.
The petitioner, a journalist, has also sought framing of guidelines and admission procedure to be followed by medical colleges till National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) comes into effect from 2017.
In his plea, S S Hooda has contended that he had carried out a sting of a UP-based medical college which had allegedly revealed that the institute was admitting students on receipt of payment of Rs 35 lakh even if the candidates had not appeared in UPCMET 2015 or filled up the admission form which were mandatory requirements.
He had also alleged that the Mathura-based institute had said that candidates, who had not appeared in UPCMET 2015, would be deemed to be admitted and they only need to appear in a mock test and their names would reflect in the merit list.
"This poses a big question on the credibility of the test held by respondnet no. 4 i.E. UP Unaided Medical Colleges Welfare Association which conducted UPCMET-2015," the petition said.
The petitioner also said he had brought this to the attention of the government and MCI, but till date no action was taken by them. The Centre had referred his complaint to the Admission and Fee Regulation Committee, Uttar Pradesh, but it too "has not taken any action till date", he said.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on August eight.