G. ARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The writ petitioner is a physically challenged person and he applied for admission to MBBS course under the said reserved category for the academic year 2018-2019. He had secured 140 marks in NEET. However, he was not granted admission because the selection committee had disputed the certificate obtained by him. Therefore, the petitioner had to file W.P.(MD)No.14777 of 2018. Vide order dated 23.04.2019, I had directed the Director of Medical Education to constitute a fresh Medical Board and give a certificate of eligibility. The Board constituted by the second respondent confirmed the status of the petitioner as a physically challenged individual. Since the academic year for which admission was sought had expired, I had directed that the petitioner could be considered for the next academic year. However, the petitioner's case was not considered for the academic year 2019-2020 also. Therefore, the petitioner filed Cont.P.(MD)No.978 of 2019. The respondents took the stand that the NEET marks obtained by the candidate in the previous year could not be made use of for gaining admission in the subsequent year. Since such a contentious issue was raised, I felt that the same could not be gone into in contempt jurisdiction. Therefore, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition, Cont.P.(MD)No.978 of 2019 was closed on 02.08.2019. Availing the said liberty, the petitioner filed the present writ petition in August, 2019. Inspite of best efforts taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the innumerable letters written by the petitioner himself, the writ petition could be taken for disposal only today ie., 06.01.2021.

(3.) When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents states that all the seats for the academic year 2020 - 2021 have already been filled up. Therefore, the only question that arises for my consideration is whether the respondents can be directed to admit the writ petitioner for the next academic year. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2019) SCC Online SC 1609 (S.Krisha Sradha vs. The State of Andra Pradesh and Others). The three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 33 (iii) answered the issue as follows:-