APOORV MEHTA Vs. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASHTHA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner before this Court appeared in National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET)-UG, 2013, conducted by Central Board of Secondary Education, for admission to MBBS course of various Universities and institutions. The respondent-University vide notification dated 23.07.2013 announced the schedule for the first counseling to be held from 27.07.2013 to 30.07.2013. Later, the first counseling was extended till 07.08.2013. Vide notification dated 12.08.2013, the University notified the schedule for the second counseling which was to be held on 16.08.2013. It was also notified that the second counseling for MBBS/BDS/PGMC would be held against the vacant seats on account of withdrawal/cancellation. Considering that 15.08.2013 was a National Holiday, the candidates were advised to obtain draft which was required to be submitted to the University, from the banks, since reporting without draft was not permitted. Vide notification dated 13.08.2013, the candidates were requested to visit the University's website on 14.08.2013 for the time schedule as well as other instructions. Vide notification dated 14.08.2013, the University announced the schedule for the second counseling. Based upon the second counseling, the waiting list of candidates was displayed on the website of the University on 19.08.2013. It was also notified that admission against withdrawal/cancellation, if any, will be made purely on the basis of the said waiting list.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that on account of inconspicuous nature of the notification and the short period which each notice entailed, she was thrown off guard and could not appear in the counseling on 16.08.2013. According to the petitioner, when she visited the office of the University on 17.08.2013, she was shocked to learn that the waiting list, which also included the names of SC/ST/OBC candidates, had already been drawn. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

(3.) IT is also alleged in the writ petition that the notification dated 14.08.2013 contained no specific averment with regard to ST/ST or OBC candidates. I, however, find no merit in this contention. All NEET qualified candidates, which obviously would include reserved category candidates, were required to attend the counseling for admission to the MBBS course at 2.00 PM. It was also specifically stated in the notice that a waiting list of all the qualified candidates, including reserved category candidates of Delhi region and all India region, would be prepared after all the seats were filled up during second counseling. The candidates, therefore, knew it very well that there shall be a waiting list prepared by the University after the vacant seats are filled up during second counseling and such list would cover candidates in all the categories, including SC/ST/OBC candidates. The petitioner having been negligent in not attending the counseling on 16.08.2013, despite as many as three public notices, issued by the University first on 12.08.2013, second on 13.08.2013 and the third on 14.08.2013, cannot be allowed to say that the University did not give enough time to the candidates to attend the counseling. It would be pertinent to note here that in the prospectus, the University did not specify any particular time to be given to the candidates, seeking to participate in various rounds of counseling. Considering the repeated public notices given by the University, I cannot accept the contention that the time given by the University was too short or that the notices issued by it were inconspicuous. Admittedly, all the notices were displayed on the website of the University. The candidates seeking admission to the courses were expected to regularly visit the site of the University so that no such notice escapes their attention. Having not been vigilant, the petitioner cannot blame the University for her own inaction in not attending the second counseling on 16.08.2013.