PRAGYA CHAUDHARY Vs. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition praying inter alia for directions to respondent No. 1/University to confirm her admission in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (in short 'BAMS') course for the academic year 2011-12 in respondent No. 2/college which is affiliated to respondent No. 1/University. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the letter dated 05.12.2011 issued by respondent No. 1/University to respondent No. 2/college declining the request to lower the minimum eligibility as prescribed in the admission brochure for the academic session 2011-12, as being illegal. Lastly, directions are sought to respondent No. 1/University and respondent No. 2/college to relax the minimum eligibility criteria in terms of the letter dated 28.11.2011 addressed by respondent No. 3/CCIM to respondent No. 1/University.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that in the year 2009, the petitioner had passed her class XII examination and she had secured an aggregate percentage of 59.67% in three subjects, i.e., Physics, Chemistry and Biology. In the year 2011, she sat for the Common Entrance Test (in short "CET") for admission to BAMS course on the basis of the admission brochure circulated by respondent No. 1/University. In the brochure for admission to BAMS course, the eligibility criteria for admission was laid down in clauses 5.3 and 5.4. The essential qualifications for eligibility for admission to the aforesaid course was stipulated in clause 5.3 as below:-

(3.) It was further stipulated in clause (C) of the Important Notes for BDS/BAMS Programme (Code 02) in the brochure, that while deciding the basic eligibility of any candidate for admission there would be no rounding-off of the percentage of marks of the qualifying examination. It is an admitted case that though the petitioner did not qualify in terms of the eligibility criteria laid down in the aforesaid brochure for the BAMS course for the academic session 2011-12, respondent No. 2/college had granted her provisional admission on 31.10.2011, subject to approval of the competent authority (Annexure P-4). Thereafter, the petitioner had deposited the fee with respondent No. 2/college on the basis of her provisional admission in the BAMS course.