Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Dr. Gopal Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Ug/pg Ayush Counseling Board & Ors. – Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 1099 of 2022
Decided On : 18-01-2022
Vacant Seats - Admission in Ayurveda PG Course - The court directed the respondent Counselling Board to allot appropriate college/University to the petitioner for pursuing his PG course against vacant seat for academic Session 2020-21.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner appeared in All India Ayush Post Graduate Entrance Test (AIAPGET) for academic Session 2020-21 and sought admission in PG course of Ayurveda. Despite vacant seats, the petitioner was not given admission.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that keeping the seats vacant served nobody's cause and was a wastage of resources. It held that the interest of justice would be better served if the petitioner was accorded admission in Ayurveda PG course against the vacant seat.
Issues: The main issue was the denial of admission to the petitioner despite vacant seats in the Ayurveda PG course.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that keeping the seats vacant was wasteful and did not serve any purpose. It emphasized the importance of utilizing available resources and ensuring that deserving candidates are given the opportunity to pursue their education.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondent Counselling Board to allot an appropriate college/University to the petitioner for pursuing his PG course against the vacant seat for the academic Session 2020-21.
ORDER
1. The petitioner having appeared in All India Ayush Post Graduate Entrance Test (AIAPGET) for academic Session 2020-21, aspiring to get admission in PG course of Ayurveda.
2. The respondent Coordinator conducted two rounds of counselling and thereafter a mop up round on 23.02.2021.
3. Whereafter stray vacancy round was held in which the petitioner was present before the concerned Board, however, he was not given admission. Now many seats were lying vacant.
4. Petitioner’s aforesaid representation is still pending.
5. Mr. Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that indisputably, many seats are lying vacant and keeping it vacant will not only take away candidates’ right, but also restrict the resource of the University. He submitted that in case the petitioner, who is passionate to do the course and is otherwise higher in merit is given admission, it would be beneficial to all concerned.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Board submitted that the said seats were offered to the candidates, who after admission resigned from seats, but however did not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that interest of justice would be better served if the petitioner is accorded admission in Ayurveda PG course. Keeping the seats vacant serves nobody’s cause - it is a wastage of resources.
8. The respondent - Counselling Board is therefore directed to allot appropriate college/University to the petitioner for pursuing his PG course against vacant seat for academic Session 2020-21.
9. Needless to observe that the fact that the petitioner is being given admission by this Court at a later point of time, will not create any equity in his favour and the petitioner will be required to fulfill requisite attendance criteria of the respondent-University for being eligible to appear in the examinations. The petitioner shall obviously be required to pay applicable fee and charges.
10. Writ petition so also stay petition stand disposed of accordingly.
The court emphasized the principle of utilizing available resources and ensuring that deserving candidates are given the opportunity to pursue their education, especially when vacant seats are availa....
Adherence to scheduled dates for admissions, merit-based selection process, and the importance of not compromising the merit and quality of medical education are crucial legal principles established ....
Adherence to the scheduled admission dates and the merit-based admission process is crucial, and mid-term admissions should be avoided to maintain academic discipline.
Court upheld the interpretation of admission guidelines, confirming eligibility of candidates who participated in earlier rounds for subsequent rounds in the counselling process.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to the rules and timelines set in the counselling process, the need to avoid disrupting settled admission processes, and the lack of a vested right ....
The Court reaffirmed that once admissions are made under specific rules, changes mid-session violate established procedural norms.
Mid-session admissions are impermissible; universities must adhere to established admission processes and criteria, including tie breaker rules.
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 prejudi....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
