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.
Khundongbam Chetan (Dr.) - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 7866 of 2022 & CM Appl. 24035 of 2022 (seeking stay)
Decided On : 02-06-2022




No legal right vested in the petitioner for allocation of vacant seat, as admission processes are bound by established counseling protocols, reflecting the principle of no fault leading to no prejudice in merit claims.

Headnote:(A) W.P.

(C) 7866 of 2022 - Admission to post-MBBS DrNB course - The petitioner, despite qualifying NEET-PG 2021, was unable to secure a seat in the desired course due to another candidate's refusal to join. The court held that resignation protocols post-counseling rounds were binding, consequently denying the petitioner’s claim for a fresh allocation of the vacant seat. (Paras 1-16)

(B) Legal principles - The principle of no fault, no prejudice was upheld, affirming the position that the merit of the claimant does not guarantee an allocation of vacant seats. The court highlighted the repercussions of altering admission processes post-scheme finalization (Paras 14-15).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner aspired to join a specialized post-MBBS course but was unable due to procedural adherence regarding seat allotment and refusal by another candidate to resign. Multiple reminders were sent by the institute without response from the counselling authority, leading to the vacant seat not being allocated to the petitioner (Paras 1-3).

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the seat direction and allotment processes followed were consistent with Supreme Court directions, thus deeming it impermissible for the vacant seat to be reallocated outside the established framework (Paras 10-12).

Issues: The main issues involved the legal right of the petitioner to claim the vacant seat duly disregarding standard protocols for resignation and subsequent counseling (Paras 7, 13).

Ratio Decidendi: The court held the allotment procedures as consistent with judicial directives; hence, there was no regulatory breach to warrant a fresh round of counseling (Paras 12-16).

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. vacant seat should be allotted if blocked seat becomes available. (Para 1)
2. counseling conducted as per due process for allocation of pg seats. (Para 2 , 3)
3. arguments based on supreme court judgments regarding seat allocation. (Para 4 , 5)
4. petitioner's claim to a vacant seat is not legally supported. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10)
5. vacancy rules applied in accordance with established guidelines. (Para 9)
6. clarifications on resignation rules and their implications. (Para 11 , 12)
7. court determined no merit in the petitioner's claims. (Para 13 , 14)
8. altering established admission processes creates unwarranted complications. (Para 15)
9. court dismisses petition due to lack of merit. (Para 16)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--The Petitioner [Dr. Khundongbam Chetan], a registered medical practitioner has qualified NEET-PG 2021 examination with All India Quota rank of 28858. Aspiring to get admission in the six-year post-MBBS direct DrNB course in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Respondent No. 4-Institute [Shija Hospitals & Research Institute Pvt Ltd.], he opted for a seat at Respondent No.4-Institute for the said course in all rounds of counselling but, was the same not allotted to him. He contends that another candidate, with a higher rank, kept the seat blocked in the first as well as second round of counselling, but eventually never joined the said course, and consequently the seat fell vacant on 04th March, 2022. In the afore-noted background, the Petitioner, inter-alia, contends that the vacant seat should be allotted to him or put up for a fresh round of counselling, failing which it would go waste.

2. Mr. Abhijit Mani Tripathi, counsel for the Petitioner, submits that common counselling for admission to PG courses was to be conducted (including DNB/DrNB course), offered by Respondent No. 4-Institute, approved by Respondent No. 2 [National Board of Examinations/"NBE"] and conducted by Respondent No. 3 [Medical Counselling Committee/"MCC"], for the first time, pursuant to directions of the Supreme Court. In terms thereof, first round of counselling was held from 07th to 30th January, 2022 ["Round-1"] wherein the Petitioner applied for his first choice for the seat with Respondent No. 4-Institute in the DrNB course in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. However, another candidate [Dr. Roweena Eunice Niveditha], being higher in the merit list was allotted the seat. The second round of counselling was then conducted from 05th to 24th February, 2022 ["Round-2"] and the seat allotment qua the said course remained unchanged/blocked and the Petitioner could not get the seat of his first choice. Later, as it transpires, Dr. Niveditha was allotted a seat in MS (Otorhinolaryngology) in CMC, Vellore on 24th February, 2022 and she submitted her resignation on 04th March, 2022.

3. Mr. Tripathi emphasises that since Dr. Niveditha did not join the course, Respondent No. 4-Institute sent an intimation to that effect to NBE and MCC. Subsequently, when Dr. Niveditha tendered her resignation, the institute immediately informed MCC i.e., the counselling authority, regarding the vacancy and requested them to include the said vacant seat in further rounds of counselling. Subsequent reminders were sent by the said institute on 31st March, 2022, 16th April, 2022 and 09th May, 2022. However, Respondents failed to include the seat in any further round of counselling. Since the seat had become vacant, the concerned Respondents authorities ought to have placed the same in the MOP UP round which would have enabled the Petitioner to get admission against the seat. Mr. Tripathi submits that the Petitioner has a keen interest in the branch of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and has been aspiring for admission in this discipline for the last several years. Now that Dr. Niveditha has submitted her resignation, the vacant seat should be allotted to the Petitioner or a fresh round of counselling should be conducted. If the seat

  • 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