Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SUNIL BENIWAL
Tirupati Balaji Educational Trust, Bhilon Ka Bedla, Udaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its Authorized Representatives Puneet Makhija, S/o. Shri Mohan Makhija – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare – Respondent
Order :
SUNIL BENIWAL, J.
1. Heard on stay application.
2. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the following prayers:-
(i) The respondents may kindly be directed to allow the scheme for increase of seats from 200 to 250 for UG Course in academic session 2025-2026 under the guideines and regulations of 2023 and grant the same to the petitioner for the Academic Sessions 2025-26.
(ii) The order/communication dated 16.09.2025 may kindly be declared illegal to the extent of not granting 50 seats (i.e. 250 seats) and the same may kindly be quashed with all consequential directions.
(iii) The order dated 11.10.2025 (Annex.27) as well as order dated 12.11.2025 (Annex.30) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(iv) The respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to participate in counselling to be conducted by the respondent No.5 (State Counselling Board) for the academic session 2025-26 with intake capacity of 250 U.G. M.B.B.S. seats.
2. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. M.S. Singhvi, assisted by Mr. Hemant Ballani and learned Senior Counsel Mr. Vikas Balia, assisted by Mr. Sudhanshu Kalla, appearing on behalf of petitioners, submit that the petitioners were granted
Court reaffirmed the necessity of timely processing applications for educational seat enhancements, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines under the National Medical Commission Act.
Interim orders allowing increases in medical college seats without proper approval are impermissible and jeopardize students' futures.
Enhancement of medical college seats must be evaluated based on current infrastructure and faculty, not solely on past deficiencies or penalties.
The court held that expert regulatory bodies' assessments of medical institutions' deficiencies are not to be overridden by the judiciary unless significant jurisdictional errors are proven.
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Siddharth Radhe Lal Gupta For the Respondent : J. K. Jain, Anoop Nair, Akshay Pawar
The distinction between the establishment of new medical colleges and the enhancement of student intake in existing colleges is critical; prior judicial rulings must not impede justified applications....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of the petitioner's request for increasing the intake of students in the MBBS course was unjustified and unsustainable, as it....
When public interest is involved, facts emerging from subsequent events can be looked into to support an administrative order.
The court emphasized that administrative delays should not deprive institutions of rights to participate in ongoing processes when requisite permissions are granted.
Adherence to procedural deadlines for application submissions is crucial, and claims of technical glitches do not warrant exceptions in compliance.
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
