Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Dinesh Mehta, J
VISHAKHA PICCHOLIYA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
CW / 4490 / 2019
(A) Admission Regulatory Committee - Minutes of the Meeting dated 18.09.2015 - Cancellation of admissions - Petitioners were admitted to Geetanjali Medical College based on CET scores, but their admissions were canceled by the Council without proper consideration of their merits - Petitioners completed their courses and received degrees - Court found no misrepresentation and deemed it unjust to dismiss the petitions at this stage. (Paras 1-9)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court emphasized the importance of fairness in administrative decisions, particularly when students have completed their courses and degrees. (Paras 6-7)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners were admitted to medical college in 2015 based on CET scores, but their admissions were canceled in 2019 after they completed their courses. The Council's decision was made without considering the merits of the case.
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the petitioners' admissions and course completions are to be regularized, emphasizing fairness and the absence of misrepresentation.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the cancellation of admissions and the fairness of the Council's decision after the petitioners had completed their courses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that it would be inequitable to dismiss the petitions given the petitioners' completion of their studies and the lack of misrepresentation.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of in favor of the petitioners.
Order :
1. Mr. Akhilesh Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners involved in the present batch of writ petitions were given admissions by respondent No.3 - Geetanjali Medical College and Hospital on the basis of the marks secured by them in the Common Entrance Test (CET) which were held by different states at the relevant time.
2. Learned counsel submitted that petitioners’ admissions were recalled/canceled in terms of the Minutes of the Meeting dated 18.09.2015 by the Admission Regulatory Committee, whereby the respondent – Council has rejected the admissions of 89 candidates pursuing their studies respondent with respondent No.3 in a single stroke of a pen, simply by observing that they had got admission on the basis of merit of the examination other than that of the private colleges i.e. through PCPMT/PMT.
3. Learned counsel argued that the reply which the respondent No.3 had filed and the documents which were produced before the respondent - Council have not been considered by the respondent No.2 - Council.
4. Mr. Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not only completed their course, but have also been awarded degrees and have received their registration.
5. Mr. Uttam Singh Rajpurohit, associate to Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondent-Union of India prays for two weeks’ time to file reply.
6. It is to be noted that the petitioners were given admissions in the year 2015 while their admissions were canceled in the year 2019-after completion of three years’ course. And by virtue of interim order(s) passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the instant writ petitions, the orders impugned have been stayed and the petitioners have continued rather completed their studies/courses.
7. No reply has been filed so far and the petitioners have completed their courses. The dispute appears to be a bonafide and there is no allegation of misrepresentation. Hence, even if the respondents have some plausible arguments to put forth, it would be iniquitous to dismiss the writ petitions filed by the petitioners at such a belated stage.
8. Hence, interim order(s) passed by this Court in all these cases are made absolute. The petitioners’ admissions so also their completion of course are regularized.
9. The present writ petitions stand disposed of, accordingly.
10. The stay applications stand disposed of.
The court ruled that it is inequitable to cancel admissions after students have completed their courses, emphasizing fairness in administrative decisions.
Admission into Postgraduate Course in Dental Sciences – Undue sympathy would lead to perpetuating illegality and giving premium to students who got admissions illegally.
The court emphasized that students should not be penalized for administrative errors by educational institutions, allowing regularization of admissions on equitable grounds.
The court affirmed the principle that students should not be penalized for institutional errors in admissions when they are qualified, allowing them to continue their studies.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous after students completed course and received certificates.
In cases of erroneous admissions, the institution cannot cancel admissions after the course has started if the candidates were not at fault, and the principle of estoppel applies.
Admissions in educational institutions must strictly adhere to centralized counselling processes as mandated by precedents to maintain fairness and transparency in selections.
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
