Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 154 (HP)

Ashu Tosh Kumar Malick v. Union of India

2015-03-09

RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2015
JUDGMENT : Per Rajiv Sharma, J. Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, issued an Office Memorandum dated 12.3.2014,reconstituting Central Seat Allocation Board (hereinafter referred to as 'CSAB' for convenience sake) for holding Joint Entrance Examination(JEE) Main 2014. National Institute of Technology, in its 7th Annual Meeting held on 18.10.2013, after due deliberations on the agenda item No. 7.21, resolved that the process for allotment of seats through CSAB to JEE meritorious candidates for the academic session 2014-15 shall be made by respondent No. 3 i.e. Malvia National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, Rajasthan. For admission to NIT, IIT and other CFTI’s and other participating institutions, merit list was to be prepared based on 40% weight age to school Boards marks in class12th or equivalent examination and 60% weight age to JEE (Main). Inorder to facilitate allotment of seats to students, CSAB was constituted with immediate effect with Dr. Inder Krishen Bhat, Director Malvia National Institute of Technology (MNIT) Jaipur, as Chairman of CSAB. Allocation of seats in the participating institutes as per para-4 of Office Memorandum dated 12.3.2014 was the responsibility of CSAB. The seats were to be allotted as per merit list prepared on the basis of JEE Main, 2014 and qualifying examination scores (Normalised). CSAB was required to disseminate information relating to participating institutions and also ensure proper scheduling and transparency of the admission process. CSAB 2014 was responsible for; i) Finalisation of procedure and schedule for seat allocation; (ii) Finalisation of resource centres and help centres and making necessary arrangements at those centres; (iii) Printing of brochure designing online choice filling forms; (iv) maintenance of website; (v) Distribution and collection of seat choices on-line; (vi) Laying down of procedure for verification of certificates and credentials; (vii) Coordinating with concerned agencies for seat allotment against State /UT- quota seats;(viii) Any other task(s) related to counselling and allocation of seats against All India quota. 2. Petitioner has secured 92% marks in matriculation examination and he has obtained 89% marks in plus two examination. Petitioner appeared in JEE(Main) 2014. Petitioner has secured 605thrank in the State and 35th rank in OBC category. Petitioner was not admitted in B.Tech at NIT Hamirpur on the ground that he has not registered himself in the first batch of counselling. On 14.7.2014, petitioner participated in 4th counselling on 23.7.2014 but could not be admitted since seats were already filled up. 3. Mr. Petitioner has secured 605thrank in the State and 35th rank in OBC category. Petitioner was not admitted in B.Tech at NIT Hamirpur on the ground that he has not registered himself in the first batch of counselling. On 14.7.2014, petitioner participated in 4th counselling on 23.7.2014 but could not be admitted since seats were already filled up. 3. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, on the basis of para 2.2 of CSAB2014 Information Brochure has argued that first round of seat registration was to be displayed on CSAB Website and for that noletters were to be sent to the candidates. He also submitted that though the petitioner has not registered himself in the first round of counselling but petitioner was given opportunity to get himself registered in 4th round of counselling on 23.7.2014 and to fill choicesby 26.7.2014 but could not be admitted due to his lower rank. 4. Ms. Ranjana Parmar has vehemently argued that the petitioner belongs to a remote area of the State and was not familiar with the intricacies of the procedure. She also contented that the candidates with lower marks have been admitted into NIT, Hamirpur. 5. Mr. Ashok Sharma learned Assistant Solicitor General of India and Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur have further argued that the petitioner himself was negligent by not getting himself registered for first round of counselling. Petitioner has secured 605th Rank and inthe category of OBC he is ranked 35th. It is true that the procedure has been laid down for registration for first round of seat allotment as per para 2.2. Petitioner belongs to a remote area of State. If he had known the procedure to get himself enrolled as per para 2.2, he would have definitely got himself enrolled since he has appeared in JEE (Main) 2014. He belongs to OBC category. His family members were also not aware of the manner in which internet was to be used. It is not denied by respondent No. 3 in its reply that the candidates who have secured lesser marks than the petitioner, have been admitted to NIT Hamirpur, Explanation given for admitting candidates with lower marks than petitioner, is that they have participated in first round of counseling while petitioner has failed to appear in the counselling. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur has also argued that petitioner himself has got registered for 4th round of counselling. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur has also argued that petitioner himself has got registered for 4th round of counselling. Petitioner has got himself registered for 4th round only when he came to know about the procedure later on. Petitioner is of tender age. He could not be penalised for not knowing the intricacies of the manner in which he was supposed to apply and get himself registered as para 2.2 of the instructions for the first counselling. 6. It is settled law by now that admissions to professional courses must be based on merit alone. Petitioner is a meritorious candidate and we reiterate that candidates who have secured lower marks than the petitioner stand admitted to the course in question. Respondents have taken a very hyper-technical view while denying admission to the petitioner. There can not be any estoppel of fundamental /statutory rights. Petitioner has a right to get himself admitted to a professional course on the basis of marks secured but has become victim of the circumstances beyond his control. Since the petitioner has got enrolled himself for the fourth round, it suggests that he was interested to get admission to the professional course. 7. The petition is allowed. In normal circumstances we would have ordered the respondents to cancel admission of candidates who have been admitted to the course despite having secured lesser marks than the petitioner, by adding them as parties, however, in order to balance the equities, respondents are directed to admit the petitioner also to B.Tech. course in NIT Hamirpur, for the ensuing academic session within three weeks from today. Shortage of lectures etc. shall be condoned in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.