Back
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL
Nikhil Telam, son of Arjun Telam – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ORDER :
Arvind Singh Chandel, J.
1. The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside/quash the impugned cancellation of admission form (Annexure P/1) and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to complete the course and to appear in the examination of Bachelor of Engineering/Technology (B.E./B.Tech) course in the respondent no.3 College, in accordance with law.
10.3 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.”
2. It is the case of the petitioner that after passing examination of 12 standard, he participated in first phase of counselling for the course of Bachelor of Engineering/Bachelor of Technology (B.E./B.Tech.) for the academic session 2020-21. After documents verification, he obtained admission in respondent 3/college for which the requisite fee was also deposited through a challan and he was attending the online classes without any interruptio
The court ruled that administrative cancellations of provisional admissions in medical education must adhere to constitutional principles, and no vested rights arise from provisional allotments under....
The court upheld the principle of merit-cum-choice in admissions, confirming that procedural fairness is essential when rectifying errors in provisional seat allotment results.
Admissions to medical colleges must be based on merit and conducted through authorized counseling, and any admission contrary to the mandatory provisions cannot be approved.
Number of seats for MBBS/BDS Courses in an Institution is fixed and cannot be increased at whims.
A procedural mistake by a student may be excused when it risks depriving a meritorious candidate of their admission, emphasizing the importance of justice over strict adherence to rules.
The High Court cannot direct the creation of additional seats for admission contrary to the statutory framework.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of strict and uniform application of rules in the admission process to maintain the integrity and sanctity of the process.
The court upheld the cancellation of admission based on the petitioner's failure to meet the eligibility criteria, affirming that procedural fairness was maintained despite the lack of a formal order....
The court upheld that while institutions possess the right to admit students, there is no entitlement to fill all available seats, emphasizing merit-based admissions per regulatory guidelines.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
