SATISH MOHAN PADHY Vs. NISER & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Opposite Party No.1, the National Institute of Science Education and Research, Bhubaneswar (in short 'NISER') has been imparting Five Years M.Sc. Programme offering learning in the core and immerging branches of basic science to students after their 10+2 AFR Higher Secondary Schooling. This is an autonomous institute under the department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, which invited applications for selection of candidates for prosecuting their studies for the academic session 2016-17 by conducting National Entrance Screening Test, 2016(NEST, 2016). The petitioner having requisite qualification applied for the said test. He was assigned with NEST Application no. 16139854. In the said entrance test, the petitioner's All India Rank was 950. Though his name was not figured in the 1st select list, subsequently, his name was indicated in the extended waiting list. Accordingly, he was called upon on 31.07.2016 to appear on 2nd August, 2016 for spot admission. Pursuant to intimation issued on 31.07.2016, due to his illness, he was not able to appear on the date fixed i.e. on 2nd August, 2016. Consequently, persons securing less mark got admitted on spot selection on 2nd August, 2016. When the petitioner approached the authority after 2nd August, 2016, he was denied admission on the ground that the last date of admission, i.e., on 2nd August, 2016 has already been closed. Hence, he has approached this Court by filing the present writ application on 12.06.2016 seeking for direction to the opposite parties to admit him into integrated five years M.Sc. programme in the opposite party no.1 institution during the current academic session 2016-17, as seats belonging to unreserved (UR) category are still lying vacant.

(2.) Mr. V. Narasingh, learned counsel for the petitioner states hat the petitioner having been selected and called upon to appear for pot admission on 2nd August, 2016, since he could not appear due to he reasons beyond his control, he should not have been denied the admission to the course for 5 years integrated M.Sc. in the opposite party no.1 institution on the plea that the last date of admission was already over w.e.f. 2nd August, 2016. It is further urged that the persons securing less percentage of marks have been given admission in the spot selection on the date fixed. If the seats are lying vacant, the petitioner, having secured higher percentage of marks, should have been given equal opportunity and, as such, should not have been denied to prosecute his higher studies. It is further urged that even if there may be similarly situated persons available for admission, since because they have not approached this Court ventilating their grievance and slept over the matter, their cases need not be taken into consideration. To substantiate his contention, he has relied upon the judgments in Asha v. PT. B.D. Sharma University Of Health Sciences And Others, (2012) 7 SCC 389 , Prasanna Kumar Nayak and others v. National Insurance Company and others, 73 (1992) C.L.T. 791 , Chandigarh Administration and another v. Jasmine Kaur and others, (2014) 10 SCC 521 , Miss Neelima Shangla, Ph.D Candidate v. State of Haryana and others, (1986) 4 SCC 268 , Ritesh Tewari and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2010) 10 SCC 677.

(3.) Considering the facts that the petitioner has a prima facie case, this Court issued notice both in the main case as well as in misc. case on 16.08.2016 fixing 23.08.2016 as date of appearance. In response to the same, Sri Sarbeswar Barik, learned counsel has entered appearance and filed counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.3, Registrar of the Institute, NISER.