SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(All) 2188

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
TARUN AGARWALA AND AJAY BHANOT, JJ.
Dr. MUKTAKAR SINGH - Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS - Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26907 of 2017, decided on 8th November, 2017)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Kaushlesh Pratap Singh for the Petitioner; C.S.C., Avanish Mishra, Mahendra Pratap and Nipun Singh for the Respondents.

Headnote:Admission – Medical Course – Cancellation of – Ground of failure to deposit the bank guarantee in requisite time frame – Challenge against – Petitioner qualified for grant of admission and bank draft tendered by petitioner towards fee was of like amount prescribed in G.O. dated 7.4.2017 – But petitioner could not deposit bank guarantee in short time as insisted upon by college authorities – Law prohibits private medical colleges from charging anything or any amount in any form or pretext beyond fee prescribed by fee regulatory committee – Mid-term admissions to medical courses specifically prohibited by Apex Court – Thus, petitioner cannot be granted admission in current academic session – Therefore, relief be moulded – Petitioner held entitled to compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs – Directions issued. [Paras 25 to 57]

       Result; Petition Dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ajay Bhanot, J.—The petitioner sat in the National Eligibility-Cum-Interest Examination-2017, (hereafter referred to as ‘NEET’) for admission to post graduate courses in medical science for the academic session 2017-18. The petitioner was declared successful in the written examination result of NEET, 2017, which was published on 21.1.2017. The petitioner thus qualified for the next competitive phase of the admission process which was the common counselling. The counselling was conducted in three separate phases namely, the first round of counselling, the second round of counselling and the MOP-UP Round. The MOP-UP Round was held on 29.5.2017.

2. At the end of the MOP-UP Round, the petitioner was issued the allotment/admission letter by the Chairman, Counselling Board, U.P. NEET-2017 on 29.5.2017. The petitioner was allotted a seat in the MD course in Subharthi Medical College (hereinafter the college).

3. The admission letter provided to the petitioner was addressed to the Principal/Dean, Director/Registrar, Subharti Medical College, Meerut. The aforesaid admission letter contained the advisory for completing the formalities of admission. The admission letter mentioned that the petitioner had deposited Rs. 1 lac towards security money at the time of confirmation of the seat. The receipt of such deposit was to be produced by the petitioner before the college authorities at the time of his admission.

4. At the date and time appointed in the admission letter, i.e., on 30.5.17, the petitioner attended before the college authorities with bank drafts of different amounts to defray the various expenses towards tuition fee, accommodation/hostel fee, refundable security. As advised, the petitioner tendered the aforesaid bank-draft No. 503894 for Rs. 15,94,700/- and Bank-draft No. 503893 for Rs.13,50,000/- dated 30.5.2017 from ICIC Bank, Bareilly to the Subharti Medical College, Meerut. The amounts manifested in the bank-drafts were sufficient to defray the tuition fee as well as the refundable security deposit and hostel expenses and hostel security.

5. The college authorities of Subharti Medical College, Meerut including the Principal-Dr. D.K. Asthana declined to receive the said drafts and refused to grant formal admission to the petitioner. On the contrary, the aforesaid staff and Principal-Dr. D.K. Asthana of Subharti Medical College, Meerut raised an additional demand of Rs. 31,89,400/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand and Four Hundred only) in the form of bank guarantee. This amount was required to be deposited by the petitioner within an hour on 30.5.17. Further, the petitioner was also informed by the Principal, Subharti Medical College, Meerut that failure to deposit the bank guarantee in the suggested time frame would entail cancellation of the candidature of the petitioner.

6. The petitioner was not informed of such requirement at the counselling. The petitioner was taken by surprise by this demand. The petitioner pleaded with the authorities to enlarge the time frame for producing the bank guarantee of the requisite amount. The pleadings of the petitioner before the college authorities were of no avail. The petitioner could not tender the bank guarantee of the said amount in the prescribed time period on 30.5.2017. The petitioner was denied admission on account of his failure to deposit the bank guarantee of the said amount to the college authorities on 30.5.2017.

7. The petitioner ran from pillar to post to register his grievances and obtain redressal. The petitioner sent an e-mail to the Director General, Medical Education and Training U.P. Lucknow on 31.5.2017, and also to the Principal of Subharti Medical College, Meerut on 2.6.2017. These efforts did not yield any results. The petitioner was informed that the rejection of his admission was irrevocable.

8. We have heard Sri Kaushlesh Prat


































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top