The right to establish an educational institution does not guarantee inclusion in student allotment if statutory approvals were received post counselling conclusion, highlighting the necessity of adhering to regulatory timelines.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arising out of a controversy concerning the participation of a newly established nursing college in the counselling process for the Academic Session 2025–26.

1.1. The prayer clauses read as under:

"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and: -

i) by an appropriate, writ, order or direction, the respondent Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS) may kindly be directed to allot 200 students in B.Sc. Nursing course to the petitioner for academic session 2025-26 by conducting counseling with all consequential directions;

ii) by an appropriate, writ, order or direction, in the alternative and without prejudice to the above, the petitioner may kindly be permitted to admit the students in B.Sc. nursing Course as per the requisite statutory qualifying criteria at its own level;

iii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, if during the pendency of the present writ petition, the last date for admission is expired then the same may kindly be extended for a reasonable time;

iv) Any other appropriate writ or order or direction which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.

(v) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner."

2. The factual matrix of the present case in brief is that the petitioner is a newly established nursing institution which sought permission to commence the B.Sc. Nursing Course with a sanctioned intake for the Academic Session 2025–26. Upon inspection by the competent authorities, the institution was found to be compliant with the prescribed infrastructural, academic and statutory requirements.

2.1. Pursuant thereto, the State Government granted No Objection Certificate (NOC) in favour of the petitioner on 13.11.2025, permitting establishment of the college with the approved intake capacity. Thereafter, the petitioner also obtained the requisite recognition/affiliation on 19.11.2025 (provisional) from the competent authority, i.e. the Rajasthan Nursing Council, in accordance with the statutory framework governing nursing education.

2.2. However, when the centralized counselling process for admission to the B.Sc. Nursing Course for the Academic Session 2025–26 was conducted by the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS), the petitioner-institution was not included in the counselling seat matrix and was consequently not permitted to participate in the counselling process for allotment of students.

3. The dispute in the present case, thus, concerns the exclusion of the institution by the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS) from the centralized counselling process for admission and allotment of students for the purpose of B.Sc. Nursing Course for the Academic Session 2025–26, despite the petitioner having obtained NOC from the State Government and recognition/affiliation from the competent nursing authorities after completion of due inspection and other formalities in regard thereto. The issue for determination is thus whether RUHS was legally justified in denying the participation of the institution in the counselling process for the aforesaid Session.

4. Learned counsel appea