SUJOY PAUL, ARUN KUMAR SHARMA
Madhav Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Paul, J:- 1. The singular question involved in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is whether petitioner after filling up the form of counselling and inserting 'No' before the entry Whether he is domicile of State of M.P. can ask for a change in the entry relating to domicile and take benefit arising thereto.
2. Indisputably, petitioner preferred his candidature for MBBS and BDS Courses and appeared in the NEET U.G. Examination, 2021. By placing reliance on the educational qualification, certificates of Class-X and ClassXII of petitioner (Annexure P-1 and P-2 respectively), Shri S. M. Guru learned counsel submits that petitioner cleared both the examinations from State of M.P. Annexure P-3 is a domicile certificate of petitioner's father wherein the name of petitioner is also mentioned. Annexure P-4 is the form through which petitioner submitted his candidature for NEET Exam wherein his permanent address of Gohad, Bhind (M.P.) is mentioned. Shri S. M. Guru, learned counsel further submits that after getting the score card of NEET Test (Annexures P-5) when petitioner was required to fill up the counselling form, he committed an inadvertent mistake and in
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.