Admissions to professional courses must adhere to the minimum eligibility criteria, and any relaxation of such criteria must be within the authority vested by the relevant rules.

JUDGMENT :

Sunil B. Shukre, J.

1. Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.

2. Heard Mr. Bansode, learned Counsel for the petitioners extensively.

3. The petitioners are the students who have been admitted to B.H.M.S Course on 13th October, 2019 conducted by three different Colleges which are respondents No.8, 10 and 12.

4. The petitioners, now, by this petition have sought direction to respondent No.6 to grant forthwith eligibility to the admissions of the petitioners taking into consideration that Admissions Regulating Authority has already regularized the admission of all the petitioners vide it’s order dated 13th October, 2021.

5. Before we deal with the order dated 13th October, 2021 passed by the respondent No.4 - Admissions Regulating Authority, we must state it here that it is not in dispute that as per the minimum eligibility criteria, students desirous of taking admission to B.H.M.S Course must have secured not less than 50 percentile of marks at NEET and the percentile secured by each and every petitioner, there are 13 number of petitioners, is below 50. In other words, as per the minimum eligibility criteria of percentile, none of the petitioners was and is eligible to secure admission to B.H.M.S Course in any of the Colleges, the respondents No.8, 10 and 12.

6. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the petitioners had approached this Court earlier by filing a Writ Petition bearing Writ Petition (Stamp) No.5903 of 2020 wherein this Court, while disposing of that petition on 2nd February, 2021 issued directions to respondents No.7 to 12 therein. These directions were in following terms;

“(i) Respondent Nos.7 to 12 shall submit the proposals for verification and scrutiny of documents of the students, who have been admitted to their colleges for the Academic Year 2019-2020, to the Director of AYUSH, State of Maharashtra, within a week from today;

(ii) The Director of AYUSH, State of Maharashtra, after scrutiny of the proposals, shall forward the same with his recommendations to the Admissions Regulating Authority within one week from the receipt thereof;

(iii) Admissions Regulating Authority shall examine and verify the proposals within two weeks from the receipt thereof;

(iv) We make it clear that the aforesaid Authorities shall consider the proposals in keeping with the directions and spirit of the order dated 20th February, 2020 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.603 of 2020;

(v) All rights and contentions of the parties on merits of the proposal for verification and scrutiny are kept open”.

7. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, following these directions and also the view taken by the Apex Court while disposing of a bunch of Civil Appeals and Writ Petitions including Writ Petition (C) No.1461 of 2019 filed by respondents No.8, 10 and 12 - Colleges, respondent No.4 found that admission of six students out of nine students, whose proposals were sent to him, could be approved and accordingly he approved the admissions of these students. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that once such approval has been granted, it is not open to National Commission for Homeopathy - the respondent No.2 to say that Admissions Regulating Authority - respondent No.4 does not have any power to grant approval by relaxing the eligibility criteria in relation to minimum percentile to be obtained by these students.

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioners also submits that the Writ Petition filed by respondents No.8, 10 and 12 - Colleges, was not finally decided by the Apex Court when in paragraph 13 of it’s judgment, it expressed it’s inability to do so by stating that there being no response filed by Central Council of Homeopathy or by Union of India due to paucity of time clarifying the factual position pertaining to the non compliance of the procedure prescribed under the Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 Act for bringing regulations, it was not in a position to decide the issue raised by the petitioners in