Courts should ensure equitable treatment of candidates in fee payment processes, particularly when delays are due to unavoidable circumstances.

JUDGMENT :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. The present petition is filed with the following prayers:-

“1. The respondents may be directed to condone the delay of few hours in depositing the fees of remaining amount of Rs. 4,17,000/- against the total amount of Rs. 18,90,000/- and accordingly, the respondents may be directed to accept the documents of the humble petitioner and admit in him in the MBBS Course accordingly consequent upon the counseling of the 2nd round and allotment letter issued on 26.09.2025, in the interest of justice.

2. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner appeared in the NEET UG Examination, 2025 and had qualified the same. Subsequent to which, the petitioner deposited the security deposit as per the relevant information booklet, the tune of Rs. 5 Lacs within the stipulated time, for appearing in the counseling in question. It is apprised to the Court that in the first round, the petitioner was not allotted with any seat, thereafter, in the second round, the petitioner was allotted a seat in a private college i.e. respondent No. 3.

3. Further, it is submitted that the schedule was published vide notification dated 14.09.2025, stating that the petitioner is required to deposit a sum of Rs. 18.90 Lacs, by 02.00 PM till 30.09.2025, which will be adjusted with the security deposit as per provisional allotment letter. Learned counsel has also submitted that the petitioner is a fatherless child with impoverished background and depends for his living and fee upon close relatives, more particularly upon his great-grandmother, who was acted as his guardian. It is submitted that the petitioners’ great-grandmother expired on 29.09.2025 and the preceding days i.e. 27.09.2025 (Saturday) and 28.09.2025(Sunday), were public holidays.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that inspite of the demise of great-grandmother and the fact that due to customary rights, the petitioner was unable to deposit the requisite money/fee within the specified time, the petitioner deposited the same with grace of few hours, by 01.10.2025. Howsoever, on account of same, as per Clause 12 of the information booklet, respondents more particularly Counseling Board reflected the seat as vacant, as fee was not deposited and the candidature of the petitioner was stated to be “not eligible” for the allotted seat, on account of non-deposition of the fee within the specified time.

5. It is submitted that at that relevant time, the petitioner was left with no other option, than to invoke the writ jurisdiction, with a prayer for regularization of seat with respondent No. 3 by condoning the delay of depositing the fee or in an alternative for adjustment of the security deposit with forwarded seats in the III round of counseling.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Counseling Board has vehemently opposed the said prayer. It is further submitted that information booklet has universal application, not only the State but pari-materia provisions are applicable PAN India, wherein categorical directions are articulated for deposition of fees and other details, within time bound manner. It is also submitted that apart from the petitioner, approx. 5500 students/candidates have deposited the fees within the stipulated time. Learned counsel has also submitted that giving excuse to the petitioner or like persons can vitiate the entire process. Learned counsel is not able to explain the prejudiced caused to the