SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, RAJESH BINDAL, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Vansh S/o Prakash Dolas – Appellant
Versus
The Ministry Of Education & The Ministry Of Health & Family Welfare & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 4427-4428 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (C) No(s). 26179-26180 of 2023)
Decided on : 20-03-2024
Admission - State Quota - NEET-UG, 2023 - Children of employees of Government of India or its Undertaking - 4.8, 9.4.4 - The court held that the appellant, a domicile of Maharashtra, was entitled to admission in the OBC/NCL category under the State quota as per clause 4.8 of the Information Brochure. The court found the cancellation of the appellant's admission to be illegal and arbitrary due to the discriminatory and arbitrary treatment meted out to the appellant under the guidelines. The court directed the creation of an additional seat for the appellant in the ongoing session of the MBBS course and awarded compensation for the deprivation and harassment caused by the illegal cancellation of admission.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a domicile of Maharashtra, sought admission in the MBBS course against the State quota under the OBC/NCL category. His admission was cancelled without notice or opportunity to be heard. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the appellant did not satisfy the requirements of the Information Brochure.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the cancellation of the appellant's admission to be illegal and arbitrary due to the discriminatory and arbitrary treatment meted out to the appellant under the guidelines. The court directed the creation of an additional seat for the appellant in the ongoing session of the MBBS course and awarded compensation for the deprivation and harassment caused by the illegal cancellation of admission.
Issues: The issues revolved around the appellant's entitlement to admission in the OBC/NCL category under the State quota as per clause 4.8 of the Information Brochure, the legality and arbitrariness of the cancellation of the appellant's admission, and the availability of restitutive relief for the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant, being a domicile of Maharashtra, was entitled to admission in the OBC/NCL category under the State quota as per clause 4.8 of the Information Brochure. The court also emphasized the discriminatory and arbitrary treatment meted out to the appellant under the guidelines, leading to the illegal cancellation of admission. The court further provided restitutive relief by directing the creation of an additional seat for the appellant in the ongoing session of the MBBS course and awarded compensation for the deprivation and harassment caused by the illegal cancellation of admission.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned orders, allowed the appeals, directed the creation of an additional seat for the appellant in the ongoing session of the MBBS course, and awarded compensation to the appellant for the deprivation and harassment caused by the illegal cancellation of admission.
Please provide the legal document content (replace {content} with the actual text) so I can extract and summarize the key points with proper references (e.g., (!) (!) ).
JUDGMENT :
Mehta, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant has approached this Court for assailing orders dated 5th September, 2023 and 26th October, 2023 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court Bench at Nagpur in Writ Petition No. 5141 of 2023 and Misc. Civil Application (Review) No. 980 of 2023 in Writ Petition No. 5141 of 2023, respectively.
3. The appellant is a domicile of the State of Maharashtra and his father is employed in the Border Security Force (BSF) as a Head Constable (General Duty) [HC(GD)]. Owing to the deployment of his father outside the State of Maharashtra, the appellant was compelled to complete his Secondary School Certificate (Standard X)(SSC) and Higher School Certificate (Standard XII)(HSC) education from a school outside the State of Maharashtra.
4. The appellant appeared in NEET-UG, 2023 craving admission in the undergraduate MBBS course against the State quota and upon being found meritorious, he was issued a provisional selection letter (CAP1) by the State Common Entrance Cell, Maharashtra on 4th August, 2023 and was allotted a seat in respondent No.6-College. The appellant completed the requisite formalities and paid an amount of Rs.13,500/-by way of admission fees. It may be noted that the appellant had applied for admission under the Other Backward Class/Non-Creamy Layer (OBC/NCL) category as being domicile of the State of Maharashtra.
5. However, without issuing notice and without providing any opportunity of being heard to the appellant, respondent No.6-College issued a letter/communication dated 9th August, 2023 cancelling the admission of the appellant.
6. The letter/communication cancelling the admission was challenged by the appellant by filing Writ Petition No. 5141 of 2023 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench raising a pertinent ground that the appellant was entitled to the exception as provided under clause 4.8 of the NEET UG-2023 Information Brochure (hereinafter referred to as ‘Information Brochure’) which pertains to the ‘Children of employees of Government of India or its Undertaking’ and that cancellation of his admission was totally illegal and arbitrary.
7. The High Court, after considering the entirety of facts and circumstances dismissed the Writ Petition No. 5141 of 2023 vide order dated 5th September, 2023 holding that the appellant did not satisfy the requirements of clauses 4.8 and 9.4.4 of the Information Brochure. It was held that since the appellant did not select specified reservation i.e., in the category of Children of Defence personnel(DEF), while submitting the online application form, he was precluded from raising such a claim at a belated stage, as being impermissible in view of the rider contained in clause 9.4.4 of the Information Brochure.
8. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 5th September, 2023, the appellant filed Misc. Civil Application (Review) No. 980 of 2023 which too was rejected vide order dated 26th October, 2023. These two orders are assailed in the present appeals.
9. Mr. Kshitij Kothale, learned counsel representing the appellant urged that the High Court misconstrued the appellant’s claim to be one under Children of Defence personnel(DEF) category because the appellant had sought admission under the OBC/NCL category as being domicile of the State of Maharashtra.
10. He contended that the appellant and his parents are domicile of the State of Maharashtra. The appellant fulfils the requisite criteria for being admitted in the State quota and stood in merit and was allotted a seat in the OBC/NCL category as a domicile of the State of Maharashtra and, thus, cancellation of appellant’s admission by the order dated 9th August 2023 is absolutely unjust and arbitrary in addition to being in gross violation of principles of natural justice.
11. Learned counsel urged that two Division Benches of the Bombay High Court, one at Nagpur Bench in Archana Sudhakar Mandulkar v. Dean, Govt. Medical College, Nagpur and others, 1986 SCC OnLine
The court affirmed the eligibility of a domicile student for MBBS admission despite SSC completion outside Maharashtra due to parental employment, confirming the applicability of exception clauses in....
Meritorious candidates who have pursued their legal right expeditiously without delay and have been denied admission to MBBS Course illegally or irrationally by the authorities for no fault of theirs....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the merit of the petitioner should have been the sole criteria for filling up the 4 reverted seats from the All India Quota, as per the Regula....
The court ruled that admissions under the NRI quota must adhere to existing rules, and arbitrary changes post-admission are invalid.
Point of law: Occasion to consider the nature of relief that can be granted to a student after the last date of admissions in case it was found that the said candidate was denied admission illegally.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of merit and fair procedure in completing admissions to medical courses, and the entitlement of a wrongfully denied student to compe....
The court established that candidates under the Sports Quota must be admitted based on their achievements, prioritizing those with higher qualifications as per the rules.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.