IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that clerical errors in the admission process that adversely affect a candidate's right to education can be rectified by allowing admission in the subsequent academic year without re-examination, provided the candidate is not at fault.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

M.W.CHANDWANI, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This is a glaring example of cut, copy and paste, wherein the petitioner lost his crucial one academic year of his education.

The petitioner appeared for Maharashtra State Common Entrance Test [MSCET] of Maharashtra State for getting admission to technical course of Bachelor of Architecture [B.Arch.] for the year 2022-2023. The petitioner successfully cleared the examination and the result was declared on 31/08/2022. The petitioner participated in Centralized Admission Process [CAP] Round 1. The list of allotment of colleges for CAP Round was published on 09/11/2022 and the petitioner was allotted respondent No.2-College. The petitioner uploaded the allotment letter from website of respondent No.1. The petitioner was required to report to respondent No.2 from 10/11/2022 to 12/11/2022 for taking admission in respondent No.2-College. When the petitioner approached to respondent No.2 for admission in B.Arch. course, respondent No.2 refused to admit the petitioner as in the allotment letter issued by respondent No.1, the reporting date was given as between 02/12/2021 to 09/12/2021 up to 05:00 p.m. The petitioner on 13/11/2022 communicated the said error to respondent No.1 by email, but nothing has been done by respondent No.1. The petitioner could not get the admission for the aforesaid reason, therefore, approached this Court by way of writ petition praying for direction to correct the date and for admission to the 1 st year course of B.Arch.

3. Respondent No.1, who conducts the Common Entrance Test in the State of Maharashtra, filed its affidavit contending that petitioner was allotted seat in CAP Round 1. Respondent No.1 admitted such mistake in the dates in letter of allotment of seat as contended by the petitioner. However, excuse has been given by respondent No.1 that during that time on 10/11/2022, the system of updating portal was in process. Such updating is required to be done while the server is live without shutting the server/portal. It is contended that unfortunately, before the process of updating, coincidentally the petitioner took out the printout at 09:24 a.m. on 10/11/2022 when the system was about to be updated. It is contended that after the petitioner took printout, immediately within official hours the said portal was updated and the dates were modified immediately within half an hour. It is contended that the petitioner could have taken second printout, but he waited till 13/11/2022. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for relief.

4. Having heard the learned Counsel Mr. C.F. Bhagwani for the petitioner, learned Counsel Mr. N.A. Gaikwad for respondent No.1 and learned Counsel Mr. A.S. Agrawal for respondent No.3. We find that by the allotment letter, the petitioner has been allotted respondent No.2-College for pursuing the course of Architecture for the academic year 2022-2023. However, perusal of allotment letter shows that in condition No.7, the reporting dates for the admission in the allotted institution are shown between 02/12/2021 to 09/12/2021 up to 05:00 p.m. Indisputably, these dates are incorrect dates, because the allotment letter was given to the petitioner after 09/11/2022. The allotment letter is shown to be printed from the portal on 10/11/2022. Rather the reporting dates in allotment letter are of a year before. Perhaps, this is a reason why respondent No.2 did not admit the petitioner in its college for pursuing the course of Architecture. Thus, there is a clear mistake on the part of respondent No.1 and the petitioner cannot be blamed for it. Even after email dtd. 13/11/2022 to respondent No.1, no steps were taken by it to accommodate the petitioner in subsequent CAP rounds. Resultantly, the petitioner could not get admission in any college.

5. During course of hearing, it was pointed to us that there are various vacant seats for the course in r