JUDGMENT :

G.A. Sanap, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

2. The petitioner is seeking direction to quash and set aside the order dated 22 October, 2021 passed by the respondent No. 1- Admissions Regulating Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘ARA’), whereby the ARA dismissed the Review Application made by the respondent No. 5 – College, seeking reconsideration of earlier order passed by the ARA dated 29 March, 2019, whereby the admission of the petitioner to Bachelor of Architecture, was not approved.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the State Common Entrance Test Cell (for short ‘State CET’) on 11 June, 2018 published admission notice for B. Architecture for the academic year 2018-2019. On 22 June, 2018, the petitioner submitted application for caste verification certificate. He completed online registration and document verification at Facilitation Centre and on verification of the documents, the petitioner was found eligible for Non CAP admission only after 22 June, 2018. The petitioner passed his H.S.C. with Mathematics and obtained 68% aggregate marks, which are above the eligibility marks of at least 50% in aggregate for Open Category. The petitioner obtained 95.5 marks in NATA (National Aptitude Test in Architecture, 2018) well above the qualifying marks of 70 in NATA. The petitioner was therefore eligible to take admission in Open Category as per the admission notice.

4. The respondent No. 5 – College on 28 July, 2018, published the time table for admission against vacant seats after culmination of Centralised Admission Process (CAP). The petitioner submitted duly filled in application form for Institutional Quota Seat and deposited Rs. 20,000/-. The respondent No. 5 – College granted admission to the petitioner in Institutional Quota Seat to the First Year B. Architecture course and uploaded the necessary admission data to the State CET on 18 October, 2018. The State CET on 29 October, 2018 published the list of the admitted students on its website.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that he was first in the order of merit of the admitted candidates from the Institutional Quota Seats. He has secured more marks than Open Category candidates, whose admissions have been approved by the respondent No. 1 – ARA. There is no reservation for filling up the Institutional Quota Seats. The admission is given on the basis of Inter-se-Merit. The petitioner has paid the fees required to be paid by candidates admitted from the Institutional Quota Seats. According to the petitioner, the State CET had published the information brochure for 2018-2019 and provided the guidelines. The guideline 12(d) has provided that there shall be no reservation under different categories for allocation of seats mentioned in 7(2), 7(3), 7(4) and 7(5). Guideline No. 7(4) is meant for Institutional Quota Seats.

6. It is stated that on 1 October, 2018, the respondent No. 4 – University accorded provisional eligibility to the petitioner. The petitioner has completed the three and half years (7 Semesters) of the course with average CGPI of more than 7 and currently studying in fourth year of the course. On 8 October, 2018, the respondent No. 5 – College submitted the merit list along with documents for verification to the respondent No. 3 – Directorate of Technical Education (DTE) vide letter dated 29 August, 2018. The physical verification of the documents was carried out by respondent No. 1-ARA. On inspection, the respondent No. 1-ARA issued a letter to the respondent No. 5 – College and approved 32 admissions and did not approve two admissions from the Institutional Quota Seats. The one admission not approved was of the petitioner on account of non submission of caste validity certificate. It is stated that the petitioner had applied for caste verification certificate, which was issued later on. It is submitted that caste validity certificate was not at all necessary. This objection is ill founded. T