JUDGMENT :

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.

1. Petitioner herein, after passing her 10+2 examination in March, 2019, has applied for admission in undergraduate courses, i.e. Bachelor in Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry (B.V.Sc. & A.H.) and Bachelor in Science (Hons.) in Agriculture (B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture), offered by respondent-University (hereinafter referred to as University). During hearing, petitioner has confined her claim to admission to the course of B.Sc. (Hons) Agriculture. In the Entrance Test, conducted by the University for assessing the merit of applicants, petitioner has scored 109 marks.

2. Apart from providing study on usual charges in various programmes, University also provides study in these programmes through admission against seats offered under Self Financing Scheme (SFS) on payment of prescribed extra fee in addition to the usual fee. Admission to these seats is also done on the basis of merit amongst the applicants who opt for admission under SFS, as per the mode of admission.

3. At the time of submitting online application for admission to B.V.Sc. & A.H. and B.Sc. (Hons) Agriculture, petitioner did not opt for SFS but applied for admission against General Category wherein last admitted candidate had secured 111 marks whereas in seats filled under SFS last admitted candidate was having marks lower than petitioner.

4. Petitioner, being aggrieved by not permitting to opt for Self Financing Scheme (‘SFS’ for short) in Second Round of Counseling/Mop-Up Round, has approached this Court with prayer for quashing of the condition as notified in Note-7 of Notice dated 3.2.2021 (Annexure P-5) and direction to the University to allow the petitioner to opt for SFS category during Second Round of Counseling/Mop-Up Round to be conducted on 8.2.2021 and to offer admission to her under the SFS category on the basis of 109 marks scored by her as in the said category candidate having marks lesser than petitioner had already been admitted.

5. Admittedly, University is offering Undergraduate Courses in various subjects, such as B.Sc. Life Sciences (Botany, Zoology & Chemistry), B.Sc. Physical Sciences (Physics, Chemistry & Mathematics), B.Tch. (Food Technology), B.Sc. (Hons.) Community Science, B.V.Sc. & A.H. and B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture. Admissions to these courses are made on the basis of merit.

6. The University, for determining the merit, has adopted two methods. For courses in B.Sc. Life Sciences (Botany, Zoology & Chemistry), B.Sc. Physical Sciences (Physics, Chemistry & Mathematics), B.Tch. (Food Technology), B.Sc. (Hons.) Community Science, the University has adopted the method of determining of merit on the basis of marks obtained by the student/applicant at the qualifying examination, whereas for determining merit for admission to B.V.Sc. & A.H. and B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture, a Common Entrance Test is conducted by the University.

7. Undoubtedly, both the methods for determining the merit for admission are permissible under law. University is free to adopt either of the methods for admission in all courses/programmes or some of the courses/programmes, as also held by a Eleven-Judge Bench (Constitution Bench) of the Supreme Court in TMA Pai Foundation & others V. State Of Karnataka & others, (2002) 8 SCC 481 in Para-59, which reads as under:

“59. Merit is usually determined, for admission to professional and higher education colleges, by either the marks that the student obtains at the qualifying examination or school-leaving certificate stage followed by interview, or by a common entrance test conducted by the institution, or in the case of professional colleges, by government agencies.”

8. After drawing merit-list, either on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying examination or in Common Entrance Test, for the purpose of granting admission to various categories, system of counseling has been adopted by the University, which, as observed by the Supreme Court in Rajiv Mittal v. Maharshi Dayanand University & others