ANNMARY LUKE KOCHERY Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rejoinder had been returned by the Registry as it had been filed beyond the period permitted by the Court. Rejoinder has been taken on record during the course of the hearing.

(2.) The facts of the present case are singular. The Petitioner asserts that she is an outstanding student having secured a position in the University. She has, however, not attended the Delhi University. She appeared in the Entrance Test for the LL.B. Degree Course (2005-06) and secured the 82nd position in the Merit List. In other words, subject to her having the requisite qualifications, in the ordinary course she would have secured the Centre of her choice.

(3.) The Schedule for Admissions is contained in the Bulletin itself. It notifies the date for declaration of Entrance Test results, First Counselling (19.7.2005), Second Counselling (23.7.2005), Third Counselling (28.7.2005), Fourth Counselling (2.8.2005). The Bulletin so contains instructions to the effect that successful candidates in order of merit in the LL.B. Entrance Test must give their preference for admission to any of the Centres of the Faculty of Law at the time of counselling and that candidates would be admitted to the Centre of their choice strictly on the basis of merit and subject to the availability of seats; the choice so exercised at the time of counselling would be final. It has also been laid down in the Bulletin that the allotment of seats to the candidates will be made only when they personally attend the Counselling session. At that time, they would have to fulfil nine conditions including filing of original documents and appearance in person.