IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1242 of 2026 ==========================================================

SWARA KIRAN BHATT Versus MEDICAL COUNSELLING COMMITTEE, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HEALTH SCIENCES ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR HITESH M SABHNANI(10731) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 02/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mitul Shelat, with learned Advocate Mr. H. M. Sabhnani, for the petitioner, and learned Advocate Mr. Ankit Shah for the respondent Medical Counselling Committee..

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs;

(A) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to direct the Respondent Authorities to include the name of the petitioner in the NRI List of Eligible Candidates for PG Round 3 (2025-26) and permit the petitioner to take part in the counselling process;

(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent to permit the petitioner to take part in the counselling process subject to such terms and conditions as the court may deem fit and appropriate in the interest of justice;

(C) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass such other and further order(s) that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner belongs to the Open Merit (General Category) and has successfully completed her UG medical course on an NRI seat. The petitioner appeared in the NEET examination for admission to the PG medical course (2025), and her All India Rank is

180339.

3.1.The brief question before this Court is whether, according to the petitioner, she is otherwise eligible for admission to the PG course under the NRI category on the basis of her PG rank. However, while uploading the necessary documents along with the application form for the NEET examination, the petitioner failed to upload the passbook of her aunt (sponsor), on the basis of which the case of the petitioner could have been considered under the NRI category.

3.2. On account of such lacuna of failing to upload the passbook, though the petitioner had disclosed the name of the sponsor and other necessary details in the application form, respondent No. 1 is now not considering the case of the petitioner for admission. According to the petitioner, such a lacuna is not such a big lacuna, which would adversely affect the career of the petitioner by denying admission to a PG course, particularly when the petitioner has secured marks higher than the prescribed cut-off marks.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Ankit Shah submitted that the process for admission to the PG course has already commenced and that the window is to be closed at around 12:00 p.m. today, while the matter is being argued at around 11:40 a.m. He submitted that, in view of the fact that the respondents have proceeded substantially with the admission process, and as the petitioner has preferred the present petition at the last moment, considering the lacuna pointed out on the part of the petitioner, her case may not be considered positively. He further submitted that although the petitioner filled up the application form in accordance with the requirements, the necessary document, namely the passbook of the sponsor, was not uploaded along with the form, and therefore, on account of the aforesaid lacuna, the case of the petitioner is not required to be considered, and accordingly, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the parties.

6. I am keeping this order as short