NEHA GOEL Vs. SIKSHA `O' ANUSANDHAN UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, in the present writ application, challenges the action of opposite party No.1 in not allotting her an M.B.B.S. seat opted by her instead allotted a B.D.S. seat in the Institute of Dental Science. The petitioner has filed the writ application on 10th June, 2013. On 12th June, 2013 Mr. V.Narsingh, learned counsel undertakes to appear on behalf of opposite party Nos. 1 and 3 and Court has directed to serve two extra copies of the writ petition on him and an extra copy of the same on Mr.R.Mohanty, learned counsel, who usually appears for Medical Council of India to file counter affidavit within two weeks. On the same day, this Court also passed interim order that any admission made in the M.B.B.S. course 2013 shall be subject to the result of the writ application.

(2.) The facts leading to the present writ application are as follows:-

(3.) Opposite party Nos. 1 and 3 have appeared and filed their counter affidavit on 19th August, 2013 taking a stand therein that the institution is a Deemed University in terms of Section 3 of the U.G.C. Act, 1956. The Medical Council of India accorded for renewal of permission for admission of 7th batch of 100 M.B.B.S. students for the Academic Session 2013-14. Accordingly, they have issued a brochure for conducting entrance test styled as "SAAT, 2013". As per Clause-14 of the said brochure, it was stipulated that selection for admission will be strictly on the basis of rank secured in the merit list subject to the availability of seats in the disciplines at the time of counseling for admission. A candidate failing to report for counseling on the date and time prescribed will not be given chance subsequently under any circumstances. Further in Clause-16 it was also stipulated that the University reserves the right to fill up the vacant seats, if any, in any discipline on a suitable basis as approved by the competent authority of the University. Since the petitioner has got 234 rank in the general category as per the rank a seat in B.D.S. course was offered to her. They have also taken a stand that out of 100 seats for M.B.B.S. course available to be filled up, 15% of seats was earmarked for NRI students and 15% of seats shall not be filled up through SAAT, 2013 awaiting the out-come of the results of NEET, 2013, which was the subject matter of challenge before the Apex Court. The last student who got admitted in M.B.B.S. course has secured the 107 rank in SAAT, 2013 and there are meritorious students than the petitioner, therefore, B.D.S. seat was offered to the petitioner and 15% of seats were earmarked for NEET, 2013 qualified candidates. Advertisement was invited through electronics media as well as through press advertisement. Pursuant to such advertisement on 27th July, 2013, 57 NEET, 2013 rank holders registered their names online seeking admission in the institution and out of them 26 candidates were found eligible for admission into the M.B.B.S. course. Out of the said 26 candidates, 15 candidates have taken admission in M.B.B.S. course and all the 100 seats of M.B.B.S. course were filled up and classes have already commenced since 1st August, 2013. Hence taking into the merit position of the petitioner in SAAT, 2013 she has no subsisting right to claim for admission in M.B.B.S. course. Opposite party No.2-M.C.I has not filed any counter affidavit in this case.