MASHALKAR PRASAD Vs. TERNA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner, desirous of pursuing MBBS Course for Academic Year 2024-25 appeared at the NEET (UG) Examination, 2024-25. Having successfully cleared the said examination, he was placed at Serial No.7490 of the Provisional Select List published by the 2nd respondent ' State Common Entrance Test Cell (for short, the CET Cell). He was therefore issued a Provisional Selection Letter indicating that he had been allotted a seat in the Institutional Quota at the 1st respondent ' Terna Medical College and Hospital (for short, the Medical College). His admission was shown in the Economically Weaker Sec. Category (for short, the EWS Category). With a view to secure admission, the petitioner in accordance with the notice dtd. 10/11/2023 issued by the 3rd respondent ' Fees Regulating Authority (for short, the FRA) was required to pay three times the regular fees for seeking admission in the Institutional Quota. The petitioner approached the College on 31/10/2024 for securing his admission with Demand Drafts for an amount Rs.26,94,000.00 being tuition fees of the First Year alongwith two more Demand Drafts for Rs.4,00,000.00 and Rs.50,000.00 respectively. The said Demand Drafts were all drawn on 31/10/2024. It is the petitioner's case that he was denied admission by the Medical College. According to him, the Medical College was demanding five times the regular fees for securing admission in the Institutional Quota. The petitioner therefore could not secure his admission on 31/10/2024. On 01/11/2024, the petitioner issued an e-mail communication raising a grievance before the CET Cell. A grievance was also raised before the FRA and hence it issued an e-mail communication to the Dean of the Medical College on 04/11/2024 requiring the Medical College to act in accordance with notice dtd. 10/10/2024 indicating the maximum fees that could be charged. An explanation from the Medical College was also sought. Since the petitioner failed to secure his admission, he has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking redressal of his grievance in that regard.

(3.) Mr. Devdatt Kamat, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had been deprived of admission at the First Year MBBS Course despite the fact that he was provisionally selected in the light of the Provisional Selection Letter issued by the CET Cell. In accordance with the schedule of fees prescribed by the FRA initially on 10/11/2023 and reiterated thereafter on 10/10/2024, it was evident that a student who was granted admission under the Institutional Quota was required to pay a maximum of three times the regular fees. As per the schedule of fees on the website of the Medical College, the petitioner prepared three Demand Drafts for amounts of Rs.26,94,000.00 (three times the regular fees of Rs.8,98,000.00), Rs.4,00,000.00 (Hostel fees) and Rs.50,000.00 (Mess fees). All these Demand Drafts were dtd. 31/10/2024 on which date the petitioner had approached the Medical College for seeking his admission. Referring to the affidavit-in-reply on behalf of the Medical College, it was submitted that the presence of the petitioner with the said Demand Drafts was admitted in paragraph 12. There was no reason whatsoever for the Medical College not to confirm his admission though the petitioner was prepared to pay the requisite fees to it. Demand Drafts towards tution fees which was three times the regular fees for the Institutional Quota were not accepted by the Medical College as it demanded an amount that was five times the regular fees. On a grievance being raised by the petitioner, the FRA took cognizance of the same and had directed the Medical College to submit a detailed explanation. The response of the Medical College as recorded on 18/11/2024 clearly indicated that the petitioner was called upon to also pay the Second Year fees while securing his admission for the First Year. He referred to the provisions of Sec. 14(5) of the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Fees) Act, 2015 (for short, Act of 2015) and submitted that the Medical College was bound to collect only the prescribed fees and nothing more. Having denied admission to the petitioner for unjustified reasons, the Medical College had come up with the specious plea that as the cut off date was 05/11/2024, it was now precluded from considering the petitioner's claim. The petitioner could not be deprived of his admission on this count especially when he was not at fault and that it was the Medical College which denied him admission. Placing reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Vansh s/o Prakash Dolas vs The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Others, 2024 INSC 235 it was submitted that the facts of the present case warranted grant of restitutive relief to the petitioner. The same could be in the form of creation of a supernumerary post to enable the petitioner to pursue his education. Since the petitioner had immediately approached this Court on being denied admission, the ratio of the aforesaid decision could be applied to the facts of the present case. He also referred to the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench at Nagpur in Aryan vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary and Others, Writ Petition No.5536 of 2024 decided on 03/10/2024. It was thus submitted that the petitioner be granted appropriate relief.