SNEHA VATS Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case, while it presents a hard set of facts, is also a case that seems straight out of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's book. Why I say so will become apparent on noticing the facts which are set forth hereafter.

(2.) Given the fact, MCC itself had invited responses from candidates against the provisional result declared by it so that discrepancies, if any, could be corrected, Ms. Vats took the opportunity to inform MCC on the same date, as stipulated, that an error had been committed.

(3.) Since it was contended on behalf of Ms. Vats that she was present at the time of verification of documents although, though, there was no such indication on the documents produced before the court, in the interest of justice, notice was issued to Ms. Pooja Dahiya, LHC and KSB. The notice was made returnable on 26.07.2019.