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

1996 Supreme(Guj) 172

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :S.D.Shah
GOYAL DIPTI RAJKUMAR - Appellant
Versus
PRINCIPAL,government AKHANDANAND AYURVED MAHAVIDYALAYA - Respondent
S.C.A. 6987 of 1995
Decided On : 04/09/1996

Advocates Appeared: C.B.DASTUR, N.K.PAHVA, N.V.Anjaria, P.M.THAKKAR, S.N.SHELAT, SEJAL MANDALIA

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 142 – Petition filed by a student seeking admission to post Graduate course - Court cannot help observing that even institution of higher education makes mockery of meritocracy and toss life of student to a stage of uncertainty and ultimately helpless student knocked door of Court of law for justice - Interference of this Court in the matter of admissions to any course in educational institution is a matter of dislike and is adversely commented upon by Apex Court of country and scope of judicial reviewability of decision taken in educational matter by educational institution is gradually restricted or conditioned – Held, Petitioner passed her B. A. M. S. Examination held in internship commenced and she completed the same on respondent Dean of Gujarat Ayurved university, issued a public advertisement inviting applications from candidates holding Degree of B. A. M. S. or equivalent for admission Institute of Post Graduate Teaching and Research in Ayurved - Courts of law are not meant for perpetrating injustice are established for administration of justice and to dispense justice - Judge of this Court has resulted into gravest miscarriage of justice for no fault of litigant engaged Advocate for purpose of rendering assistance to Court - Petitioner never knew that Advocate who was engaged by her was a retired District Judge and was unwire of proceeding constitution of India said Advocate did not appear on number of occasions single Judge thereupon passed certain conditional order and when another junior Advocate was engaged also asked for adjournment - While granting adjournment condition was put that no further adjournment shall be granted and in view of observation single Judge has passed afore quoted order - Effect of order is that Letter of Admission which was already issued to petitioner pursuant to which was already admitted to M. D. Ayurvedic course is set at naught and some other candidate is given admission and petitioner is rendered absolutely helpless - Injustice is perpetrated in temple of justice itself – Petition allowed(Para 12)

S. D. SHAH, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition filed by a student seeking admission to post Graduate course of M. D. (Ayurved) to the pioneer institution of ayurvedic education in the entire country, namely, the Gujarat Ayurved university, Jamnagar, represented through its Dean, has brought to the surface a very sorry, sordid and dismal state of affairs prevailing in the institution of higher education. So gross are the lapses and lack of coordination on the part of the Gujarat Ayurved Univeristy and the Principal of Government Akhandanand ayurved Mahavidyalaya at Ahmedabad that this Court cannot help observing that even institution of higher education makes mockery of meritocracy and toss the life of the student to a stage of uncertainty and ultimately helpless student knocked the door of the Court of law for justice. The interference of this Court in the matter of admissions to any course in educational institution is a matter of dislike and is adversely commented upon by the Apex Court of the country and the scope of judicial reviewability of decision taken in educational matter by educational institution is gradually restricted or conditioned. Before this Court proceeds to deal with the scope of its jurisdiction in light of various binding decision of the Apex Court it would be necessary to refer to the facts giving rise to the present petition.

( 2 ) CASE of the Petitioner : (i) The petitioner passed her B. A. M. S. Examination held in October, 1994, the internship commenced from 1-1-1995 and she completed the same on 30/06/1995. (ii) On 14/03/1995, respondent No. 2, Dean of Gujarat Ayurved university, issued a public advertisement inviting applications from the candidates holding the Degree of B. A. M. S. or equivalent for admission to (1) 3 years M. D. (Ayurvedic) course and (2) 2 years P. G. Diploma in Panchakarma course of the jamnagar Institute of Post Graduate Teaching and Research in Ayurved. It was also stated that the application form and the rules for admission could be obtained from the Dean, second respondent and that they will be issued from 20/03/1995. It stipulated that the last date for receiving the admission form duly filled-in at the institute of Post Graduate Teaching and Research is 22/05/1995. (iii) The petitioner initially in the memo of Special Civil Application simply stated that as she was interested in prosecuting her Post Graduate studies in Ayurved medicine, she had tendered the admission form for securing admission. Prior thereto, she was misinformed or misguided by the staff of the first respondent College that she was ineligible to apply for admission as she has not completed her internship. However, her application form for admission to M. D. (Ayurved) Course was duly recevied and accepted as on 31/05/1995 and that vide letter dated 25/06/1995, issued by the Principal of the College, she was directed to appear at the entrance Examination to be held on 29th of June, 1995 at 9-00 a. m. at the Deans office, Administrative Building, Gujarat Ayurved University at Jamnagar. She accordingly appeared at the Entrace Test Examination and duly passed the same. Till that date, she was never informed that she would be denied admission to M. D. (Ayurved) Course as her admission form was received late, i. e. , on 31/05/1995. (iv) In response to the stand taken by the Dean of Gujarat Ayurvedic University in affidavit-in-reply to the effect that the last date for submitting the duly filled in application forms for admission was 22/05/1995 and that application from the petitioner was received on 31st of May, 1995, her application was not required to be considered and that she was not even entitled to appear at the Entrance Test, the petitioner in the rejoinder-affidavit filed by her pointed out that in fact the admission form was denied to her by P. G. clerk, other staff and Principal of the first respondent-College on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible to apply for admission to M. D. (Ayurved) Course as sh













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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