The court may decline to exercise jurisdiction in writ petitions if a more appropriate forum exists, even if part of the cause of action arises within its jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. (ORAL)

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioner-institute i.e. Smt. Manjira Devi Ayurveda Medical College and Hospital seeking the following relief:

“i a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ(s) and/or Order(s) and /or Direction(s) to allow the students of the batch of 2022 to appear for the regular as well as electives examinations for the entire course duration along with other relevant examinations for the course; and/or”.

2. The case set out by the petitioner-institute i.e. Smt. Manjira Devi Ayurveda Medical College and Hospital, is that it is the sole Ayurveda medical college located within the nine hilly districts of Uttarakhand. This self-financed institution offers the B.A.M.S. (Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery) course. It is stated that historically, admissions to the course were conducted based on the merit list prepared from candidates’ qualifying examination scores, as directed by respondent no. 1 i.e. Uttarakhand Ayurveda University. However, since 2021, the institute has been required to admit students exclusively through the National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET), posing significant challenges for students from these remote and economically disadvantaged regions. It is stated that many students were unaware of NEET's requirements or lacked the means to travel to distant examination centers, leading to a severe drop in admissions. For the academic year 2022-2023, only 04 out of the 60 available seats were filled through NEET, resulting in a 93% vacancy rate. In an attempt to address this, the petitioner-institute had admitted additional students who had appeared for but failed to qualify for NEET. Notably, some of these students had later qualified NEET. It is stated that the petitioner-institute, situated near the Indo- China border, faces unique challenges due to its remote location but has become a vital educational and healthcare hub, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the grievance of the petitioner-institute that despite its significant contributions, the respondents have not provided adequate support to address the challenges it faces.

Consequently, the petitioner seeks judicial intervention to ensure that its students can continue their education and provide essential healthcare services in these hilly regions.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner- institute argues that the refusal by the Uttarakhand University of Ayurveda to allow the students of the 2022 batch to appear for the first profession examinations violates their fundamental rights under Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The students were admitted in good faith under the guidance and past practices, and they have a legitimate expectation to complete their education. It is further argued that the petitioner, being the only Ayurveda Medical College in the nine hilly districts of Uttarakhand, plays a crucial role in providing medical education and healthcare in this remote region. It is submitted that the arbitrary decision by the respondent University to prevent these students from taking their exams jeopardizes not only their futures but also the medical needs of the local population. It is also stated that the Ministry of AYUSH and other respondent authorities have failed to account for the unique geographical and infrastructural challenges faced by institutions like the petitioner in the hilly terrain of Uttarakhand.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Farman Ali, Senior Panel Counsel, who appears on advance notice on behalf of respondent no. 2 i.e. Union of India, at the outset, opposes the present writ petition on the issue of maintainability. It is argued that the petitioner-institute is located at Hitanu Dhanari, Dunda-Uttarkashi, Uttarakhand and any remedy sought by the petitioner-institute against the respondents will fall within the territorial ju