SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 359

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
Utkarsh Mittal, S/o. Shri DR. Ghanshyam Mittal - Petitioner
Versus
Maulana Azad Medical College 2, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, Delhi-110002 and 5 Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No.2671 Of 2023
Decided On : 03-03-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Khanna, Mr. Manuraj & Ms. Kshitij Goel.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal alongwith Mr. Sanyam Suri, Mr. Kirtiman Singh and Mr. Waize Ali Noor.

Adherence to scheduled dates for admissions, merit-based selection process, and the importance of not compromising the merit and quality of medical education are crucial legal principles established in the judgment.

Headnote:

Vacant Seats - Admission - NEET-PG - 2022-2023 - [Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh, (2002) 7 SCC 258; Mridul Dhar (Minor) & Anr. v. UOI and Ors., (2005) 2 SCC 65; Supreet Batra & Ors v. Union Of India & Ors., (2003) 3 SCC 370; Education Promotion Society for India and Anr. v. Union of India, (2019) 7 SCC 38; Astha Goel and Ors. v. The Medical Counselling Committee and Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 734] - The court discussed the legal provisions and principles related to the admission process for NEET-PG, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the scheduled dates for admissions and the merit-based selection process. The court highlighted that granting admission after the scheduled date would compromise the merit position of other candidates and result in half-trained professionals. The judgment also emphasized that there cannot be any compromise with the merit and quality of medical education, which may ultimately affect public health. The court cited various cases to support its decision and concluded that the petition stands dismissed.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought admission to MS (Orthopaedics) in respondent colleges after not being allotted any seat in NEET-PG counselling rounds. The petitioner claimed that there were two vacant seats in the colleges and requested admission against these vacancies.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the scheduled counselling rounds were completed, and no subsequent round of counselling was available. It emphasized that granting admission at this stage would compromise the merit position of other candidates and result in half-trained professionals. The court also noted that mid-term admissions are not permissible for specialized courses such as PG.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could be granted admission against the vacant seats in the respondent colleges after the completion of scheduled counselling rounds.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal principles related to the scheduled dates for admissions, merit-based selection process, and the importance of not compromising the merit and quality of medical education. It cited various cases to support its decision and emphasized that mid-term admissions are not permissible for specialized courses such as PG.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT :

[Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.]

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

    “In the premise, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

(i) pass an order directing respondent no. 1 and respondent no.2. to indicate the position of remaining vacant seats in their respective colleges; and/or

(ii) pass an order directing respondent nos. 3-5 to grant admission to the petitioner in MS (Orthopaedics) either respondent no. 1 or respondent no. 2 college; and/or

(iii) pass such other order or order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner appeared for NEET-PG, 2022 examination on 21.05.2022. The results were declared on 08.06.2022. The petitioner secured a rank of 18715. Respondent No. 3 undertook counselling process for admission, but the petitioner did not find his place, being less in merit. The Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) conducted first, second and mop up round counselling followed by stray round and special stray round. In none of the counsellings, petitioner could get any seat of his choice. The petitioner, however, had come to know about vacancy of few seats in respondents Colleges, then on 06.12.2022, the petitioner visited respondent Nos. 1 and 2 College to accommodate him on one of the seats, but it was of no avail. A petition was filed by him before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which was also dismissed with liberty to approach this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are two seats still vacant in respondent Nos. 1 and 2 College. According to him, in mop-up round, two seats were not taken into consideration and they were not shown in the available vacancy. He, therefore, submits that since two seats were not shown in the mop-up round, therefore, there was no question of opting those seats by any of the students either in mop-up round or in stray vacancy round. Resultantly, those two seats remained vacant and if those two seats were allowed to go waste, the same would be a national loss. The Government has spent considerable money and infrastructure to maintain the seats and if the seats are not filled up to their full strength, the same would be against public interest. He further states that those two seats are not being sought against any other candidate but the seats are still vacant, therefore, the petitioner be considered for admission against vacant seats.

4. This matter was listed yesterday i.e., on 02.03.2023 and this court called upon the respondents to explain about the vacancy position with respondent Nos. 1 and 2-College.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that all seats were earlier filled up; however, on account of resignation by two candidates on 11.11.2022, two seats had fallen vacant. He, however, submits that on account of resignation the security amount etc., was to be forfeited and those candidates have challenged their forfeiture in writ petitions, which are pending. It is thus seen that two seats in respondent No. 1- College are admittedly vacant as of now.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents, however, opposes the petition and submits that once the entire counselling is over no seats can be allotted to any other candidate. According to them, there is a known procedure to be followed for allotment of the seats as per the schedule. After conducting the first and second round of counselling the mop up round is conducted and once the mop up round is over the stray vacancy round was to take place. In the instant academic year i.e., 2022- 2023 it’s not only the stray vacancy round was conducted but even thereafter, the special stray vacancy round was also conducted. It is stated that by 14.01.2023, the entire allotment of seats and admission etc. is over and as of now no admission can be directed to be given on the basis of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top