A procedural mistake by a student may be excused when it risks depriving a meritorious candidate of their admission, emphasizing the importance of justice over strict adherence to rules.

ORDER :

Nirzar S. Desai, J.

1. Heard Learned Advocate Ms.Kruti Shah with Learned advocate Mr.Subham Jhajariya for the petitioner, Learned Additional Advocate General Ms. Manisha Lavkumar Shah with Mr.Kanva Antani for respondent No.5 i.e. Admission Committee for Professional Under Graduate Medical Educational Courses (ACPUGMEC), Learned advocate Mr.Harsheel Shukla for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Learned advocate Mr.Vikas Nair for respondent No.3 Mr.K V Shelat for respondent No.4 and Learned Advocate, Mr. Anuj Trivedi for respondent No.6.

2. The matter was extensively heard on 13th and 14th November 2025, and detailed orders were passed on both days. As I am apprised of the fact that the fourth round of admission to the MBBS course is going on at present instead of narrating the facts elaborately, the interest of justice will be served if the order dated 13th November 2025 is reproduced to give an idea about the controversy involved in the petition in question.

3. Following order was passed by this court on 13th, November 2025;

“1. It was appraised to the Court by learned advocate Ms. Kruti Shah appearing with Mr. Shubham Jhajharia that the petitioner is a meritorious student who initially sought admission in Dr. N. D. Desai Faculty of Medical Science and Research, Nadiad where she completed all the formalities which she was supposed to complete to get admission in MBBS Course. Later on, in the 3rd round of admission, she opted for respondent No.6 College – Narendra Modi Medical College where also, admission was granted to her. However, as per the procedure laid down by the Committee, after downloading the allotment order, upon payment of fees, a student would be given Provisional Admission Order and upon submission of that Provisional Admission Order, only his or her admission would be reported in the system and the seat would be shown as filled up. In the instant case, upto the payment of fees, the petitioner has followed the procedure, but thereafter, upon someone’s advice that now upon payment of fees, she is not required to submit the Provisional Admission Order on the helpdesk and, therefore, a seat was shown as vacant in the system of respondent No.5. Now, a situation has arisen whereby the petitioner’s admission would be cancelled and the seat for which she has already paid the fees would be allotted to someone else and despite payment of fees, her career would be ruined. Ms. Shah, therefore, prayed that in view of above bonafide mistake, it may not happen that the career of meritorious student is ruined as the petitioner has already secured admission and even studied the class of MBBS, she was also made a part of Whatsapp group created by the College and in the attendant sheet also, the petitioner has signed. Therefore, when there is a question about saving a student’s career, the Court while considering Rules and technicalities may also consider that there is no fault on the part of the student and, therefore, a sympathetic view is required to be taken and her career is required to be saved as she is otherwise found to be meritorious and there is no allegation about any mal- practice or otherwise are alleged against her.

2. Learned advocate Mr. Kanva Antani appearing for respondent No.5 submitted that as such, as per the procedure laid down, the petitioner cannot be said to have taken admission in the respondent No.6 College since she did not report and could not be granted Provisional Admission Order. He fu