BHARTI GOUDA Vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DESIGN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Digant Popat appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Samruddhi Pawar for the petitioners of Special Civil Application Nos.10207 and 10917 of 2023, learned Advocate Mr.Mitul Shelat appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Disha Nanavati for the petitioner in Special Civil Application No.10454 of 2023 and learned Advocate Mr.D.G. Shukla appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Meshwa Bhatt for respondent National Institute of Design in all the petitions. Since the issue involved in this group of petitions is common, and since the petitioners were heard together, this Court deems it appropriate to decide these petitions by way of this common judgement. Since details with regard to individual petitioners may vary, for the sake of convenience, this Court seeks to state details of individual candidates in Chart Form for easy reference. <IMG>JUDGEMENT_1482_LAWS(GJH)7_2023_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) The petitioners are all pursuing their Bachelor Degree and whereas in all the above cases, except in case of petitioner of Special Civil Application No.10207 of 2023, all the petitioners have already appeared in their final year/semester examinations. The respondent National Institute of Design (hereinafter referred to as 'NID') had invited applications for admission to various Post Graduate Courses for the academic session commencing in the year 2023-24 vide a Notification dtd. 21/10/2022 and whereas, the petitioners had appeared in the entrance examination being the Design Aptitude Test (DAT) Prelims, which was held in the month of January 2023 and whereas the results were declared in the month of February 2023. Thereafter the Institute had conducted the DAT Main examination and whereas, after clearing the Main examination, the petitioners were given provisional admissions, subject to payment of fees and whereas all the petitioners had deposited the fees as directed by the Institute towards their first Semester fees. It appears that the NID had published an 'Admission 2023-24' Hand-book, which inter alia contains general information with regard to the entrance examination, important dates with regard to admission process, details with regard to various courses and the seats available, the eligibility criteria, applicable reservation, mode of application, details with regard to DAT results and other information.

(3.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Digant Popat for petitioners of SCA No.10207 of 2023 and SCA No.10917 of 2023, who would submit that the cut-off date by the NID i.e. of having appeared in the qualifying examination by 30/6/2023 and providing provisional degree certificate/degree certificate by 31/7/2023 is completely arbitrary. Learned Advocate would rely upon revised guidelines on examinations and academic calendar for Universities in view of Covid-19 Pandemic by UGC published in the month of April 2020. Learned Advocate would submit that though the guidelines have been issued in view of the pandemic situation prevailing at the relevant point of time, yet such guidelines are still being followed by other prestigious Institutions. As per the UGC Guidelines, while the admissions for under-graduate and post graduate programmes for the session 2020-2021 would be completed by 31/8/2020 and whereas the academic session could commence from 1/9/2020 and relevant documents of qualifying examination may be accepted up to 30/9/2020. Learned Advocate would take this Court through admission guidelines of various Institutions, including IIT, Delhi; IIT, Kanpur; National Law University, Bangalore; etc., and would submit that most of the Institutions have their admission programmes aligned with the guidelines of UGC. Learned Advocate would further submit that the petitioners are the members of the Association of Indian Universities and whereas the policies of NID need to be aligned with the policies of other Institutions. Learned Advocate would further submit that the respondent is also a member on the Board of AICTE and whereas even the AICTE inter alia envisages admissions to be granted for fresh admissions much later than the admission process envisaged by the respondent Institute. Learned Advocate would also submit that the petitioner being a prestigious institute should align its admission policy with other Institutes, so as to enable students to have a fair idea about the admission process of all such institutes of repute.