Huda Ansari vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Del) 2159

SANJEEV NARULA
Huda Ansari – Appellant
Versus
Jamia Millia Islamia – Respondent

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Tariq Adeeb and Mr. Shoaib Haider, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr. Kamal Digpaul and Ms. Swati Kwatra, Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, Mr. Tanvir Zaki, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV NARULA, J.

1. Considering the fact that the above-captioned petitions raise identical grounds of challenge, arising out of similar facts, the same are being disposed of vide a common order. As the prayers sought are also identical, for the sake of reference, the prayer clause from W.P.(C) 5017/2022 is extracted hereinbelow:

“a) Pass an order or direction to the respondent to set aside the notice/order dated: 16.03.2022 and 17.03.2022 issued by the respondent no. 1 and 2 respectively;

b) Pass an order or direction to stay the order/notice dated 16.03.2022 and 17.03.2022 issued by the respondent no. 1 & 2;

c) Pass an order or direction to the respondent no. 1 & 2 to lock the seats of the petitioners in the BDS allotted to them vide provisional allotment letter dated 02.02.2022 till the pendency of the case; and

d) Pass any other and/or further relief to the Petitioner, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Briefly stated, Petitioners No. 1 and 2 viz. Huda Ansari and Noora Khalid, respectively in W.P.(C) 5017/2022, and Petitioner – Shabnam Yasmin in W.P.(C) 5329/2022 appeared for National Eligibility Entrance Test UG (“NEET-PG

Click Here to Read the rest of this document