Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
DINESH MEHTA
Pooja Punaram Patel, D/o. Punaram Patel – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Through Its Controller Of Examination – Respondent
Judgment :
(DINESH MEHTA, J.)
1. These writ petitions involve almost common facts and law and hence, being disposed of conjointly.
2. However, for the sake of brevity and clarity, the facts are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1988/2021 : Pooja Punaram Patel & Ors. Vs. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences & Anr.
3. Mr. Manoj Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel espousing the cause of the petitioners submitted that all the three petitioners, namely, Pooja Punaram Patel, Kanishka Sharma and Harshita Sadhwani have appeared in NEET Examinations-2019 and had cleared the same and took admission in the Vyas Dental College and Hospital, Jodhpur in accordance with law. However, the allegation leveled by the respondent-Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (hereinafter referred to as ‘RUHS’) and Dental Council of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘DCI’), is that their names had not been uploaded on the official websites of DCI and RUHS by cut-off date i.e. 15.09.2019 by the respondent – college. 4. He asserted that the petitioners got admission and pursued their studies after being provisionally admitted by the RUHS on 18.09.2019. Meanwhile, DCI sent a letter to all the dental colle
The court emphasized that students should not be penalized for administrative errors by educational institutions, allowing regularization of admissions on equitable grounds.
Admissions in educational institutions must strictly adhere to centralized counselling processes as mandated by precedents to maintain fairness and transparency in selections.
Admission into Postgraduate Course in Dental Sciences – Undue sympathy would lead to perpetuating illegality and giving premium to students who got admissions illegally.
Colleges must obtain proper authorization from the relevant university before admitting students; unauthorized admissions can lead to penalties.
The court ruled that it is inequitable to cancel admissions after students have completed their courses, emphasizing fairness in administrative decisions.
The court established that institutions must seek prior approval for admissions beyond the prescribed quota, but students may have legitimate expectations based on past practices.
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.
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
