Write Back

The Supreme Court vide its 1993 judgement had fixed the fees for the medical NRI seats at five times the payment seat fees. Last year, the government-approved payment seat fee was Rs 1,26,500 per year and as per the DMER MS-CET 2003 brochure, the NRI quota is considered as Management quota, hence the Management quota seat fee was Rs 6,32,500 per year. The total four and half year’s course fee works out to Rs 28,48,250. This is the fee structure since 2000 and is due for revision this year.

Also, there is a time constraint, the Medical Council of India, vide its letter dated 28th May, 2003, has conveyed that 30th September will be the last date for completion of the admission process. The responsibility of filling the management seat quota rests entirely with the management of the colleges. The MCI has also proposed a fine of Rs 50,000 per student for contravention of their directives.

Considering the above, we are trying to take detailed information of candidates interested in seeking admission to the first year at Terna Medical College under the management quota.

We explain last year’s fee structure to the interested candidates as an indicator of the likely fees for the course. We also convey that the new course fee structure proposed by the Association of Managements of Unaided Private Medical and Dental Colleges, Maharashtra, works out to over Rs 32,00,000. You will appreciate that finding candidates who can afford to pay fees in this range is a difficult task and hence the need of collecting information of interested candidates.

The merit list of candidates willing to pay the government-prescribed management quota fees will be prepared and final admissions granted as per directions of the competent authorities. All this is explained to the prospective candidates. Further, the admissions are confirmed only after issuance of an eligibility certificate from the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences.

Your reporter has misconstrued the facts presented to him and it should be abundantly clear that a question of any malpractice or capitation fees does not arise. The figure of Rs 27,00,000 is a valid indicator of government-approved course fees for the four-and-a-half-year course in the management quota and the Rs 32,00,000 is the course fee proposed by the Association of Management of Unaided Private Medical and Dental Colleges, Maharashtra, for the year 2003-2004.

At Terna Medical College, we have sincerely endeavoured to offer the best possible medical education to the students. We have the highest number of approved teaching staff amongst all medical colleges in Maharashtra. The university results are consistently good with a more-than-average number of distinction holders in each subject. Your article has lowered the image of the institute without any valid reasons.

In all fairness, we expect you to publish our clarification as prominently as you have published the news item.

— R.V. Mudliar, Chief Executive Officer, Terna Public, Charitable Trust, Terna Medical College Campus,Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai-400 706

Shailesh Gaikwad replies:

The Supreme Court judgement in October 2002 was not in the Unnikrishnan case but on a bunch of petitions filed by TMA Pai Foundation and others. While delivering its verdict, the Court clearly stated that the judgement in Unnikrishnan case is no longer valid. This also means that the five-times-above-normal fees fixed in the Unnikrishnan case are also invalid. The previous judgement was based on the understanding that half of the seats — supposed to be filled on merit — should be charged at concessional rates and rest should be above cost to cross-subsidise the merit seats. Since the apex court has allowed unaided colleges to charge fees based on actual costs for all students, since the last year’s system is no longer valid, why do unaided colleges like Terna insist on collecting Rs 27 lakh and more from the students? If their transactions are really transparent, why do they fail to publish their balance sheets?

The focus of the report in any case was more on the manner in which the management seats were being filled. The person dealing with management quota seat admissions was not only unauthorised to do so by the admission of the head of the Trust, Irrigation Minister Padmasinh Patil, but is on videotape asking reporters posing as students to deposit a token amount to book the management quota seat. Is this what the trust calls ‘‘collecting information of interested candidates’’?