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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J.
Vishnu Todi (Dr.) - Appellant
Versus
All India Institute of Medical Sciences - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1994 of 2022
Decided On : 30-05-2022




An administrative discretion by PGIMER to reserve seats for foreign nationals only in specific academic sessions cannot create an inherent right to admission across other categories or schedules.

Headnote:(A) Admission Criteria for Foreign Nationals - Crossing of Categories - The case concerns a foreign national's denial of admission to a super-speciality course due to an alleged lack of available seats for foreign candidates. The court noted that no seats were reserved for foreign nationals in the January session as per the prospectus. (Paras 14, 17, 19).

(B) Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation - The petitioner's eligibility was established after exams; however, the court concluded that a right to admission was not created due to the lack of category seats. (Paras 12, 19).

(C) Administrative Discretion - PGIMER is vested with the authority to define and regulate its admission policies, including reservations exclusively for certain categories during specific batches. (Paras 11, 19).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, having cleared the INI-SS Examination, was selected for admission in PGIMER for a unique medical course. Upon inquiry about his admission, he learned that there were no seats available for foreign nationals in the January 2022 batch, leading to this petition.

Findings of Court:
The court held that PGIMER had authority over its admission policies and that prior communication about seat availability was erroneous but did not entail a right to admission under a non-existent category.

Issues: Primary issues included the administrative prerogative to allocate seats and the implications of the lack of clarity in the prospectus regarding foreign national admissions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the absence of allocated seats violates no rights, and PGIMER's clarification regarding foreign national admissions is legitimate.

Result: The petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's eligibility for admission is contested. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. contentions about seat allocation rules. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. court analyzes admissions policies and eligibility. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. pgimer's right to determine seat allocation upheld. (Para 19)
5. petition dismissed based on admission criteria. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--Petitioner - a Nepalese national, is aggrieved with the denial of admission in M.Ch. (cornea, cataract and refractive surgery) course [hereinafter, "said course"] by Respondent No. 2 - Post Graduate Institute of Medical Research and Education, Chandigarh ["PGIMER"], despite fulfilling the eligibility criteria and being declared as a selected candidate in the entrance test for Institutes of National Importance Super-Speciality ["INI-SS"] conducted by Respondent No. 1 - Examination Section of All India Institute for Medical Sciences ["AIIMS"], pursuant to a Merit List dated 25th December 2021, on the ground that Respondent No. 2 did not have any seats reserved for foreign national candidates. He thus seeks direction to Respondents to grant him admission.

BRIEF FACTS

2. In October, 2021, AIIMS invited applications from eligible candidates, including foreign nationals, for admission to various degree courses, including the said course, for the academic session commencing from January 2022. Pursuant thereto, Petitioner appeared for, and subsequently cleared the INI-SS Examination. On 25th December, 2021, AIIMS released a merit list of provisionally qualified candidates, wherein Petitioner was selected for admission in PGIMER in the said course under the `foreign national' category.

3. It is the case of the Petitioner that pursuant to the result, he made several attempts to contact PGIMER regarding further procedure for admission. By way of an email communication dated 28th December, 2021, he was informed by AIIMS that he need not apply for counselling. Thereafter, as he did not receive any further instructions, aggrieved from the lack of communication regarding his admission, Petitioner approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, which, vide order dated 19th January, 2022, directed him to approach the Director of PGIMER, and accordingly, he made a representation dated 20th January, 2022.

4. Thereafter, on 25th January, 2022, by way of an email communication, he was informed by AIIMS that the allocation of seat to him was erroneous and no seat was available to foreign national candidates at PGIMER. The said communication reads as follows:

    "From: AIIMS INI-SS

    Date: Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 17:05

    Subject: Withdrawal of Candidature for M.Ch-Cornea, Cataract & Refractive Surgery at PGIMER, Chandigarh for January-2022 session

    To: Vishnu Todi

    Cc: DMMCh Section

    Dear Candidate,

    Attention drawn towards allocation of seat for course M.CH in subject/specialty of Cornea, Cataract and Refractive Surgery Vide result notification 205/2021 dated 25.12.2021.

    It is informed that seats under Sponsored and Foreign National category are not interchangeable at PGIMER, Chandigarh and an allocation to you has been made inadvertently. The mistake has been communicated to you by the PGIMER on the day of reporting at the Institute.

    In continuation of same it is hereby informed that the said allocation on sponsored seat in M.Ch. Cornea, Cataract and Refractive Surgery stands cancelled as you have applied under Foreign National Category and there is no seat available for Foreign National in the said specialty at PGIMER, Chandigarh.

    The inconvenience caused is deeply regretted."

5. Pursuant to AIIMS's communication, PGIMER, vide letter dated 29th January 2021, withdrew the Petitioner's admission, stating that seats under the above-noted categories are not interchangeable at PGIMER, Chandigarh.

6. Assailing the two aforesaid communications as arbitrary and unjust, Petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

CONTENTION

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