PRATEEK ROHILLA Vs. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for directions to the respondent No.1/IIT-Delhi to permit him to appear in the competitive examination, i.e., JEE-2012 and to issue him an admit card for the said purpose. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the letter dated 13.03.2012 issued by respondent No.1 in reply to an application submitted by him for appearing in the IIT- JEE, 2012.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case as set out in the writ petition are that in May, 2011, the petitioner had passed the intermediate examination from the CBSE Board. On 02.11.2011, the petitioner had applied for IIT JEE-2011 in the reserved category (SC). On 10.04.2011, the petitioner had appeared in JEE-2011 examination. On 25.05.2011, he was informed that he had qualified the JEE-2011 examination. On 21.06.2011, respondent No.1 declared the results of the counselling held by them. In terms of the counselling, the petitioner was allotted Engineering Design (Automotive Engineering) Five Year M-Tech Dual Degree Course at IIT-Madras. On 22.06.2011, the petitioner deposited a sum of `20,000/- towards non-refundable registration fee by making an online payment. As per the seat allotment letter dated 10.07.2011 addressed by the Organizing Chairman, JEE-2011 to the petitioner, he was offered admission to the first year of the aforesaid course under the SC category for the academic year, 2011-12 and was called upon to report at IIT-Madras on 26.07.2011, failing which it was informed that the offer of admission would be cancelled. It is the case of the petitioner that due to some personal reasons, he could not report at IIT-Madras for registration on the assigned date and as a result, could not take advantage of the seat allotted to him in the subject course for the academic year 2011-12. On 29.11.2011, he received a refund for an amount `19,000/- from the respondent No.3/IIT (Madras), towards the fee deposited by him in June 2011.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contends that Clause 3.5 of the Information Brochure is applicable only to those candidates who had taken admission in JEE-2011 batch and cannot include candidates like the petitioner as he had neither reported for joining, nor deposited the admission fee. He states that the counselling fee paid by the petitioner in JEE-2011 having been refunded by respondent No.3/IIT (Madras), the petitioner cannot be barred from appearing in IIT JEE-2012. It is further urged that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents, if the petitioner is allowed to appear in the competitive examination as he has neither caused any financial loss to them, nor has he taken admission in respondent No.3/IIT (Madras). It is lastly urged by learned counsel that the mere act of depositing `20,000/- as registration fee does not tantamount to admission in the Institute as payment of the said amount was only a pre-condition imposed on the candidates to appear in the second counselling session for upgradation to better choices/courses.