RAJESH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. As short question is involved, the petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent.

(2.) PETITIONER has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction against the respondents to process his claim for D.M. Cardiology seat after the result of moderation is announced. The moderation is necessitated on account of the decision of this Court, dated 26th September, 2013. The petitioner applied for some information under Right to Information Act on 28th September, 2013, which information could have answered the grievance of the petitioner and justified the assertion of the petitioner that he is entitled to admission to D.M. Cardiology course. That information was supplied on 3rd October, 2013. After receipt of the said information, the petitioner made representation on 7th October, 2013 and since no response was received, has rushed to this Court on 15th October, 2013.

(3.) COUNSEL for the University, on instructions, submits that if the University is permitted to declare those results and if the petitioner is found eligible in order of merit, his claim can be considered against the vacant seat of D.M. Cardiology. That, however, will be subject to the permission, to be granted by the Court to admit the petitioner beyond the period specified by the apex Court as 30th September, 2013 for the super -specialty admission as last date. This submission is canvassed on the basis of observations made in paragraph . 30 of the decision of the Apex Court in Asha Vs. PT. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and others (2012) 7 SCC 389.