RAHUL TOLIA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND OTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is an unfortunate candidate, but it is he, who has to be blamed. The petitioner appeared in a pre-medical test called PMT. He was successful. However, he did not join first counselling and chose to remain absent. According to Mr. Alok Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner thought that he may not be able to get the seat in medical college for M.B.B.S. course in the first counselling at all. Therefore, he decided to take chance in the second counselling. The condition for the second counselling is as under The English translation of the above passage in Hindi would be that in case any applicant does not join the course after allocation, he will not be eligible for taking part in the next coun­selling. The information with regard to counselling will be published from time to time in the Uttaranchal edition of Amar Ujala and Dainik Jagran. Appli­cants may keep watch on these news­papers in their own interest.

(3.) THE petitioner feels aggrieved by this condition and says this amounts in introducing a condition to the detri­ment of the candidates like petitioner because the petitioner relying on the earlier mentioned condition quoted in Hindi, if takes his chance, will be put to jeopardy in case even the candi­dates, who were allotted seats in the colleges due to their higher percentage, are allowed to take part in the second counselling, thereby marring the chances of the persons like the peti­tioner. In short, the contention of the petitioner is that once any candidate takes part in the first counselling and is allotted seat, he shall be debarred from taking part in the second counselling.