SANDEEP DHAMA Vs. THE STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present matter the petitioner had appeared in the CET held on 29th March, 2014 by the respondent no. 2-University for admission to various post graduate medical courses. The petitioner had applied under the OBC category. After the first round of counselling held on 30th March, 2014, another OBC candidate Dr. Saurav Verma who had initially opted for a seat against roster point 80; had thereafter surrendered his seat before the second round of counselling. Thus this seat as surrendered by Dr. Saurav Verma was offered during the second round of counselling held on 8th May, 2014.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the seat surrendered by Dr. Saurav Verma was against roster point reserved for a OBC candidate but during the second round of counselling, the same was included in the existing seats and now offered to the next candidate as per the roster point who was a general category candidate. The petitioner states that the seat vacated by an OBC candidate must be offered to the next OBC candidate in the merit list and ought not to be relegated to the General pool.

(3.) The petitioner further states that during the third round of counselling held between 20th June, 2014 to 25th June, 2014 again the seats were offered to the candidates without having a regard to the fact whether such seats had been offered to reserved category students in the earlier rounds. The petitioner states that the process and method of counselling adopted by the respondent no. 2 is faulty. The petitioner further states that when any candidate belonging to an OBC is offered a seat against a reserved roster point and he after opting for the said seat, surrenders the same, the said seat in the future rounds of counselling must necessarily be offered to a same category student, i.e., OBC as per order of merit.