JUDGMENT : Dipankar Datta, J. This writ petition, presented before this Court on September 24, 2014, is at the instance of a daughter-father duo. The first petitioner (hereafter Sweta) had taken the All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2014 (hereafter the "AIPMT - 2014"). Having obtained 415 marks, Sweta ranked 19309. The writ petition primarily concerns Sweta's right of admission in an institution imparting medical education, availing the Employees State Insurance Corporation Management Quota (hereafter the quota). 2. An admission notice was issued by the Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereafter the ESIC) on August 13, 2014 inviting applications for admission of wards of insured persons in undergraduate course (MBBS) in ESIC Medical Colleges for the academic session 2014-2015 as per admission policy and procedure approved by the Central Government. 3. Incidentally, the second petitioner (hereafter Dr. Singh) is the holder of an ESIC card and claims to be entitled to benefits flowing from schemes introduced by the Central Government in favour of such holders. In terms of such notice, the ESIC Medical College at Joka, Kolkata had an intake capacity of 52 seats of which 26, 08, 04 and 14 were reserved for General, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and OBC candidates respectively. The mechanism for filling up of the quota reads as follows: "Mechanism for filling up of ESIC Management Quota Available seats of 'ESIC Management Quota' in various States will be pooled on 'All India Basis' and allotted, amongst the wards of Insured persons (IPs). The 'guiding principles' for filling up of ESIC Management Quota will be as under:- The ESIC Management Quota seats will be filled on merit cum preference basis. Reservation policy of Central Government for SC/ST/OBC/PH etc. will be followed for allotment of seats. Candidates seeking admission under 'ESIC Management Quota' will have to fulfil the following eligibility criteria: Minimum eligibility criteria for admission will be as per MCI regulations. The selection and admission to MBBS seats in any Medical Institution recognised for running MBBS Courses as per Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 is subject to fulfilling the admission criteria, eligibility, medical fitness and such other criteria as may be prescribed by the Universities etc. In event of any difference in criteria of MCI and Affiliating University etc., the higher criteria will prevail. In event of any difference in criteria of MCI and Affiliating University etc., the higher criteria will prevail. Applicants are advised to refer to the websites of the Affiliating Universities, i.e. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS) for ESIC colleges in Karnataka; West Bengal University of Health Sciences (WBUHS) for ESIC colleges in West Bengal and The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University (TNMGRMU) for ESIC colleges in Tamil Nadu, for further information. Application must be accompanied by 'Ward of Insured Person' Certificate, issued by concerned Regional Director/SRO I/C. [Annexure - II] Candidates will be allotted seats, based on their category and merit cum preference of Institution, through a centralized counselling to be conducted by ESIC in Delhi for the ESIC Management Quota as per schedule provided. The venue and other details for the counselling will be posted on the website in due course. Candidates are requested to check the web-site regularly for further details." (bold font, underlining, italics in original) 4. The candidates were required to submit applications in a prescribed format with copies of required certificates and affidavits so as to reach the ESIC Headquarters office latest by 5.00 pm on September 1, 2014. While September 3, 2014 was fixed as the date for display of provisional list of eligible candidates called for counselling, September 10 and 11, 2014 were fixed for first phase of counselling and if at all required, a second phase of counselling was fixed on September 18, 2014. It has been claimed in the writ petition by the petitioners that only on September 20, 2015, Dr. Singh came to learn from one of his colleagues regarding admission of a ward of an insured person in the MBBS course in the quota that is available whereupon he had searched the website of the ESIC and came across the admission notice dated August 13, 2014. Consequent thereto, the petitioners had established contact with the Dean of the ESIC Medical College at Joka but were apprised of the fact that the counselling had been over on September 18, 2014 and, therefore, nothing could be done to accommodate Sweta. 5. Consequent thereto, the petitioners had established contact with the Dean of the ESIC Medical College at Joka but were apprised of the fact that the counselling had been over on September 18, 2014 and, therefore, nothing could be done to accommodate Sweta. 5. The specific claim raised in the writ petition is that there was no wide publicity of the admission notice dated August 13, 2014 and, therefore, the petitioners were disabled to obtain information in relation to the admission policy with particular reference to reservation for wards of insured persons. 6. In paragraph 9 (nine) of the writ petition it has been pleaded that throughout India 83 (eighty-three) seats could have been filled up through the quota but only 21 were filled up. The last candidate who obtained admission had secured 366 marks, which is much less than what Sweta obtained at the AIPMT - 2014. More importantly, in the ESIC Medical College at Joka, only 2 (two) candidates secured admission availing the quota and the rest 24 (twenty-four) seats were transferred for inclusion under the State quota on September 22, 2014 and that counselling for such transferred vacant seats would be held between September 26 and 29, 2014. Having regard to the grave urgency that had arisen, the petitioners invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking, inter alia, the following relief: 'b. A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents, more particularly the respondent nos. 6,11 and 12, their agents, men, successors, survivors, servants and/or any one of them to admit the petitioner No. 1 in the MBBS Course 2014-15 in the unreserved category for ESIC Management quota immediately in the respondent No. 11 Medical College;' 7. As wished by the petitioners' learned advocate, the writ petition was taken for consideration on September 25, 2014. For further hearing, the writ petition was directed to be listed the following day. However, the writ petition was considered at length on September 26, 2014. By an interim order passed on that date, I had directed provisional admission of Sweta making it clear that if ultimately the writ petition fails, the petitioners would not be entitled to claim any equity. Affidavits were invited from the parties and the writ petition was directed to be placed for hearing on November 21, 2014. By an interim order passed on that date, I had directed provisional admission of Sweta making it clear that if ultimately the writ petition fails, the petitioners would not be entitled to claim any equity. Affidavits were invited from the parties and the writ petition was directed to be placed for hearing on November 21, 2014. Upon exchange of affidavits, the writ petition was considered on November 28, 2014 and then again on subsequent dates at length. 8. The question that would arise for decision on consideration of the affidavits filed by the parties and the arguments advanced on their behalf is, whether there was due publication of the admission notice dated August 13, 2014? It is axiomatic that if the answer is in the negative, the interim order directing Sweta's provisional admission should be made absolute whereas the answer being in the affirmative, Sweta would have to withdraw herself from the medical course. 9. Publication of the admission notice, as it appears, was made in daily newspapers. The fact that certain seats are reserved for the said quota was also part of the Information Bulletin of the AIPMT - 2014. The question thus has to be answered keeping these two aspects in mind. 10. Since the admission notice was issued by the ESIC, it would be absolutely necessary to consider first what it has pleaded in its affidavit-in-opposition. In paragraph 5 (five) of the affidavit, it has been pleaded by the 12th respondent (Dean of the ESIC Medical College at Joka) that the concerned admission notice was duly published in all India newspapers on August 15, 2014, pursuant whereto many candidates had applied for admission. The petitioners did not exercise due diligence and their ignorance cannot be a ground for a direction on the ESIC to allow Sweta to continue pursuing the medical course. Copies of the advertisements that were published are part of the affidavit. It has also been pleaded in the said affidavit that the balance seats reserved for the said quota were transferred to the State in terms of the prevailing policy by a memorandum dated September 11, 2014 and that Sweta cannot continue to pursue medical education contrary to the statutory provisions governing the field. 11. It has also been pleaded in the said affidavit that the balance seats reserved for the said quota were transferred to the State in terms of the prevailing policy by a memorandum dated September 11, 2014 and that Sweta cannot continue to pursue medical education contrary to the statutory provisions governing the field. 11. Dealing with such affidavit-in-opposition, it has been pleaded by the petitioners in their affidavit-in-reply as follows: "5(a) ***** I specifically state that no wide circulation of the policy decision of the central Government in regard to ESI Management quota for admission in UG Course (MBBS) was made by the Central Government or by the Medical Council of India by way of electronic media and newspaper publication. This inaction has caused enormous prejudice to the students of this category inasmuch as no aspiring candidate has any business to go to the website of the ESI Corporation. The admission notice for 2014-15 in UG Course (MBBS) was not also widely circulated by the ESI Corporation and this would be evident from the Annexure 'R-1' to the affidavit in opposition. Moreover, the advertisement that was published on 15th August, 2014 in the Telegraph, Calcutta Edition and Times of India, Kolkata Edition, was not so conspicuous and visible that one by looking at the said advertisement knew that was in relation to admission process in under graduate MBBS Course. Times of India of Kolkata Edition has a limited circulation only in Kolkata and that cannot be construed to be a circulation in one national paper in English. The advertisement that was published only one day seem to be an advertisement in relation to business/affair of ESI corporation. This being the position, the advertisement had escape the notice of the petitioner and other similar situated persons inasmuch as had it been widely circulated in the State of West Bengal, only two students (that too from outside the State of West Bengal) out of 50 seats in the management quota in the ESI - PGIMSR & ESIC Medical College, Joka would not have applied for in UG (MBBS Course) for 2014-15. 5(b) I also state that the advertisement has not been widely published by the ESI Corporation and it published the advertisement only one day in two English newspapers in the State of West Bengal. This advertisement is also not in compliance with the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 5(b) I also state that the advertisement has not been widely published by the ESI Corporation and it published the advertisement only one day in two English newspapers in the State of West Bengal. This advertisement is also not in compliance with the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. According to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, all notification/announcements of details, results an counselling for admission in the medical courses are to be published in two successive issues of newspapers including one National paper of English and at least two local papers in the language of the State. This clearly demonstrates that the wide circulation of the advertisement was not made by the ESI Corporation resulting the petitioner and others to be deprived from such admission and this is evident from the number of students admitted against the management quota of ESI - PGIMSR & ESIC Medical College, Joka. It is also found from the Annexure 'R-1' to the affidavit in opposition that the advertisement was published in the state language in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand and not in West Bengal." 12. Although the petitioners have not clearly referred to the citation in the above extract, reliance was placed on their behalf at the hearing by Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate on the decision reported in (1987) 4 SCC 459 [Dinesh Kumar (Dr) v. Motilal Nehru Medical College]. While dealing with post-graduate admissions, the Supreme Court required publication of notification/announcement of details, results and counselling for admission in 2 (two) successive issues of newspapers, including one national paper in English and at least two local papers in the language of the State. The aforesaid decision was noticed by the Supreme Court in its decision reported in (2012) 7 SCC 433 (Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh) and it was directed that "all admissions through any of the stated selection processes have to be effected only after due publicity and in consonance with the directions issued by this Court". 13. It appears to be the admitted position that the admission notice had been published only on August 15, 2014, a day that is remarkable for another reason for the people of India. Insofar as the State of West Bengal is concerned, the admission notice was published only in 'The Telegraph' and the Kolkata edition of 'The Times of India'. 13. It appears to be the admitted position that the admission notice had been published only on August 15, 2014, a day that is remarkable for another reason for the people of India. Insofar as the State of West Bengal is concerned, the admission notice was published only in 'The Telegraph' and the Kolkata edition of 'The Times of India'. The petitioners are right in their contention that although admission notices were published in vernacular dailies having circulation in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand, there has been no publication in any local Bengali or Hindi newspaper; that, according to them, is contrary to the dictum of the Supreme Court. Along with English newspapers, the admission notice should have been published at least in one newspaper of the language of the State. The petitioners have pleaded that publication of admission notices in 'The Times of India', Kolkata edition and 'The Telegraph', both English newspapers, escaped their notice. The date of publication being the anniversary of the countrymen gaining freedom from British rule, it is common knowledge that people all over the country celebrate the occasion by honouring and paying due respects to the martyrs. The publication of the admission notice at not too prominent places in the 2 (two) English newspapers and that too with other commercial advertisements on a national holiday, without the same being followed by another one on the following day or soon thereafter, and in the absence of publication of such notice in any vernacular daily having circulation in the State of West Bengal, in my humble view, does not conform to the directions of the Supreme Court regarding wide publicity and, therefore, the issue formulated for decision regarding due publication of the admission notice in the print media has to be answered in the negative. 14. Much has been argued by Mr. Saugata Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the Medical Council of India (hereafter the MCI) and Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the State to the effect that with the advent of technology, particularly having regard to the fact that Sweta had participated at the AIPMT - 2014 through an online process, she must be presumed to have knowledge of gaining access to the website and to derive necessary information therefrom with regard to admission in the medical course availing the said quota. 15. Mr. 15. Mr. Bhattacharya has also argued that Sweta's admission has resulted in enlargement of the permissible intake capacity of the ESI Medical College at Joka, which is clearly contrary to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, as amended, and the rules/regulations framed thereunder and, therefore, the provisional admission of Sweta should be revoked. In support of his contentions, Mr. Bhattacharya has relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in (1998) 6 SCC 131 (Medical Council of India v. State of Karnataka), (2005) 2 SCC 65 [Mridul Dhar (5) v. Union of India], AIR 2013 SC 1115 (Faiza Choudhary v. State of J&K), AIR 2012 SC 3396 (Asha v. Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences) and AIR 1994 SC 595 (State of Punjab v. Renuka Singla). (2012) 10 SCC 770 : Rajan Purohit v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, (2005) 9 SCC 779 : Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE, (2012) 7 SCC 389 : Asha v. Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, (1983) 3 SCC 517 : Punjab Engg. College v. Sanjay Gulati, (2012) 7 SCC 433 : Priya Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh, (1987) 4 SCC 459 : Dinesh Kumar (Dr) v. Motilal Nehru Medical College in support of his contention that the writ petition lacks merit. 16. Let me now consider the worth of the contentions raised and whether the same ought to be accepted or not. 17. The ESIC decided to enter the field of medical education during 2007-2008, with a view to improve the services rendered to its insured persons, i.e. the factory labourers and small scale employees, by providing secondary, tertiary and super speciality level in-house medical care and to ensure the availability of adequately trained human resources in the form of doctors, nurses and paramedical staff. An amendment to the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereafter the ESI Act) was mooted in 2009, where after section 59B was inserted in the ESI Act with effect from June 1, 2010 ordaining as follows: "The Corporation may establish medical colleges, nursing colleges and training institutes for its para-medical staff and other employees with a view to improve the quality of services provided under the Employees' State Insurance Scheme." 18. Since then, the ESIC has set up 12 (twelve) post-graduate institutes, 18 (eighteen) under-graduate medical colleges and 9 (nine) dental colleges all over India. Since then, the ESIC has set up 12 (twelve) post-graduate institutes, 18 (eighteen) under-graduate medical colleges and 9 (nine) dental colleges all over India. Insofar as the ESIC Medical College at Joka is concerned, admission of students for the first batch of MBBS course started in 2013 and the session 2014-15 is only the second session of medical course thereat. One of the objects for opening of the ESIC Medical Colleges has been to give benefit to the wards of insured persons whereby the admission policy was formulated reserving a quota for admission in the medical colleges for the wards of insured persons. Such reservation quota is unique to the medical teaching institutions of the ESIC, in order to encourage the factory labourers and small scale employees to give proper higher secondary level science education to their wards who are deserving and meritorious. 19. Medical education to be imparted to the wards of insured persons who obtain admission under the quota is, therefore, at a nascent stage. People for whom the benefits are conceived may not have a clear idea about it. For reaching out to the people for whose benefit section 59B was inserted in the ESI Act as well as to make the insured persons and their wards aware of the facilities flowing from the quota reserved for wards of insured persons, it was absolute necessary and imperative that proper and reasonable publication is widely made to enable those insured persons extract maximum benefit. Unfortunately, there has not been proper circulation of the admission policy and this finding is returned on the basis of the documents annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the State. 20. Ms. Bhattacharya referred to the Information Bulletin of AIPMT - 2014. She emphasised on Clause 4, at the second page of the bulletin, under the caption 'IMPORTANT' requiring candidates to follow the instructions strictly as given in the Information Bulletin as well as on the website. 20. Ms. Bhattacharya referred to the Information Bulletin of AIPMT - 2014. She emphasised on Clause 4, at the second page of the bulletin, under the caption 'IMPORTANT' requiring candidates to follow the instructions strictly as given in the Information Bulletin as well as on the website. Clause 10 under the heading 'ADMISSION AND RESERVATION' was next referred to by her wherein it was mentioned that: 'An All India merit list of the qualified candidates shall be prepared on the basis of the marks obtained in the All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test as mentioned under rule 15 of this Bulletin and candidates shall be admitted to MBBS/BDS courses under 15% All India Quota Seats and seats under the control of participating State Governments/Universities/Institutions from the said list only by following their Reservation Policies and other admission criteria.' 21. Clause 10.2 was thereafter referred to by her, and to the extent relevant, it is set out hereunder: '10.2 Admission in State Medical Colleges/unidersities/institutions/AFMC For Seats Other Than 15% All India Quota. (a) In case a State/University/Institution opts to admit students in its medical colleges from the merit list of AIPMT 2014, it may prepare separate rank list based on All India rank in AIPMT and other criteria decided by it. (b) List of States/Universities/Institutions that have decided to use the result of AIPMT 2014 as on the date of publication of this Information Bulletin is at Appendix-VIII. Candidates seeking admission in seats other than 15% All India Quota are advised to visit the websites of State/University/Institution as mentioned at Appendix-VIII and contact their authorities concerned in advance for eligibility criteria and other details for admission. ****' 22. Appendix - VIII referred to in the aforesaid extract is at pages 31 and 32 of the Information Bulletin and Mr. Sanyal is right in his contention that the same does not include the name of the ESIC Medical College at Joka. Under clause 13(x), the last bullet point refers to 'Choice of Colleges for 15% All India Quota' see Appendix - IX (page 33). Appendix - IX at pages 33 to 62 lists various medical colleges including the ESIC Medical College at Joka, Kolkata. But, Mr. Under clause 13(x), the last bullet point refers to 'Choice of Colleges for 15% All India Quota' see Appendix - IX (page 33). Appendix - IX at pages 33 to 62 lists various medical colleges including the ESIC Medical College at Joka, Kolkata. But, Mr. Sanyal is again right in his contention that the said list of medical colleges indicates where allotment under 15% All India quota would be available and says nothing about the quota of insured persons of the ESIC and, therefore, could not have given any hint to Sweta that as a ward of an insured person and on the basis of her merit position, she is entitled to claim admission in the ESIC Medical College at Joka. 23. Even if the Information Bulletin had purported to give the petitioners' information, it would hardly have been relevant. The bulletin was published for a particular purpose viz. giving detailed information to examinees seeking to take the AIPMT - 2014. However, the time period between publication of the Information Bulletin of AIPMT - 2014 and the admission notice in the newspapers on August 15, 2014, does make a difference in the approach that is likely to be adopted by an examinee. When the Information Bulletin of AIPMT - 2014 was published, I believe all prospective examinees devoted full time, care and attention in preparing for admission to any medical college rather than keeping a track of quotas that are available and, therefore, Sweta may not be at fault. 24. The Information Bulletin, therefore, does not stand in the way of granting relief to Sweta. 25. Ms. Bhattacharya, however, also referred to a pre-admission notice dated December 20, 2013, which is to the following effect: "Pre-Admission Notice Admission in UG course (MBBS/BDS) in ESIC Medical/Dental College for Academic Session 2014-15 under ESIC Management Quota. 1. Admissions to UG Courses (MBBS/BDS) in ESIC Medical/Dental Colleges under ESIC Management Quota will be done on the basis of 'All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2014' to be conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), Delhi. 2. Prospective/desirous and eligible candidates have to appear and qualify in 'All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2014' for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses in ESIC Medical/Dental Colleges. 3. 2. Prospective/desirous and eligible candidates have to appear and qualify in 'All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2014' for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses in ESIC Medical/Dental Colleges. 3. Insured person for the purpose of availing benefit of ESIC Management Quota for his/her wards shall be, as under :- 'The 'Insured Person' shall be an 'employee' as defined in the ESI Act; and he/she should have been in continuous insurable employment for a period of five years as on 1st January of the year of admission and should have paid at least 78 days of contribution in each contribution period, during this five year period.' 4. 'Ward of Insured Person' will be a legitimate natural born child who is wholly dependent on the earnings of the insured person and who is - (i) receiving education, till he or she attains the age of twenty-one years, OR (ii) an unmarried legitimate natural born daughter Note: The above is liable to modification with the approval of the Central Government, from time to time. 5. The details of the 'All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2014' are available on the website www.aipmt.nic.in Prospective applicants are requested to check the ESIC web-site; www.esic.nic.in, on regular basis, for further information/instructions." (bold font, underlining, italics in original) 26. Replying to my query, Ms. Bhattacharya submitted that the deponent of the affidavit obtained such notice from the website of the ESIC. According to her, an inference ought to be drawn that if the petitioners were diligent and had visited the website of the ESIC, they could have derived knowledge of admission in the said quota; since there has been lack of diligence on their part, they are not entitled to any order from this Court. 27. Although Ms. Bhattacharya is right in her contention that the website of the ESIC carried the notice dated December 20, 2013 and did give some indication of a quota being reserved for wards of insured persons, this is also not considered sufficient to deny relief. The petitioners have pleaded that they did not have any prior knowledge of existence of a quota for insured persons, which could facilitate Sweta's admission in a medical course. At the time the notice dated December 20, 2013 was published, the prospective examinees were yet to take the AIPMT - 2014. An examinee has to study hard, secure a reasonable rank and then think of gaining admission. At the time the notice dated December 20, 2013 was published, the prospective examinees were yet to take the AIPMT - 2014. An examinee has to study hard, secure a reasonable rank and then think of gaining admission. Before the examination proper is conducted, I am of the opinion that it is asking too much of an examinee or her father to visit the website of the ESIC for finding out possible avenues for admission. On the flip side, if indeed the petitioners had resorted to such course, they would have run the risk of being accused of compromising merit and seeking to get through a quota and not on merit, thereby earning a bad name for them. 28. The contention based on the notice dated December 20, 2013 also does not aid Ms. Bhattacharya. 29. For the same reason as discussed above, Mr. Bhattacharya's contention referring to the Information Bulletin of AIPMT - 2014 has not impressed me. 30. Now, I take up the other branch of argument advanced by Mr. Bhattacharya. According to him, every medical college, recognised by the MCI, is duty-bound to follow the statutory provisions as well as the terms and conditions of recognition. If a particular medical college has been permitted to admit 'x' number of students, there can be no admission in excess of 'x' and the provisional admission granted to the petitioner has, in fact, disturbed the balance of medical education in the ESIC Medical College at Joka as well as the teacher-student ratio thereat. He referred to several provisions of the regulations framed under the 1956 Act to buttress his arguments. 31. The affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the MCI has been looked into. It is replete with extracts of decisions of the Supreme Court which Mr. Bhattacharya placed in extenso. While it cannot be gainsaid that such decisions fixing time lines for admission and requiring all concerned linked to medical education to strictly adhere to the intake capacity of educational institutions imparting medical education are binding, the directions of the Supreme Court for wide publicity of admission notices in a proper and reasonable manner are also equally binding on all concerned. Suffice it to record that the directions of the Supreme Court regarding publication of details pertaining to admission in medical course in two successive editions of local newspapers had not been followed by the ESIC; not only that, there has been no justification as to why the admission notices were published in Hindi in three other States and not in West Bengal. If the admission notices could be published in Hindi in three States without the same being published in Hindi newspapers having circulation in this State, it was for the ESIC to come forward with a plausible explanation which, I may record, it has failed to furnish. I also hold that the website notice dated December 20, 2013 could not have been a substitute for a proper notice being published in terms of the directions of the Supreme Court. 32. The argument of Mr. Bhattacharya as regards admission of Sweta in excess of the intake capacity proceeds on a misconception. It is not that Sweta has obtained admission in the ESIC Medical College at Joka over and above the intake capacity of such college. Having regard to her rank and on the basis of the result of AIPMT - 2014, as of right Sweta was entitled to admission in a seat reserved for the said quota if only she had applied within the deadline. But for inappropriate publication of the admission notice, Sweta would have definitely obtained admission in a seat reserved for wards of insured persons. In fact, it has been noted that for insufficient number of qualified wards of insured persons the seats meant for them have been transferred to the State quota, thereby leading to abject frustration of the object for which medical education through ESIC run medical colleges was conceived. By an order dated November 28, 2014, I required the State to report as to whether any complaint from any candidate more deserving than Sweta had been received objecting to provisional admission of Sweta depriving such complainant. Nothing in this regard was reported. Even otherwise, Sweta was directed to be admitted within the last day fixed for admission. There is no material to show that at the time the interim order was passed directing provisional admission of Sweta, all other students had taken admission and the available seats were filled up. Nothing in this regard was reported. Even otherwise, Sweta was directed to be admitted within the last day fixed for admission. There is no material to show that at the time the interim order was passed directing provisional admission of Sweta, all other students had taken admission and the available seats were filled up. Assuming arguendo that all students had taken admission, Sweta could not have been denied admission since she was armed with an interim order directing her immediate provisional admission, which none of the parties ever challenged. If admission of Sweta were to create difficulties in the sense that mandatory statutory provisions would be violated in the process, nothing prevented the authorities to seek suitable modification/variation of the interim order before admitting her. Alternately, if any other candidate was yet to be admitted, he ought not to have been admitted and the Court's attention drawn to the fact of excess admission being required to be made in compliance with such order. At this juncture, it would be inequitous to hold that admission of Sweta was beyond the intake capacity of the ESIC Medical College at Joka. 33. The first semester results of all the first year students had been placed before me. It appears that Sweta has performed commendably. This is also a factor that the Court has to bear in mind while deciding the rights of the parties in the light of the larger object that could be achieved if Sweta graduates as a doctor. Being the ward of an insured person and having obtained admission availing the quota, she would have additional responsibilities to shoulder, which other medical graduates may not be obliged. 34. The contentions advanced by the learned advocates for the MCI and the State are not sound and do not persuade me to revoke provisional admission of Sweta. 35. I have considered the decisions cited by Mr. Bhattacharya. Each provides valuable guidance in regard to the strict procedure that is to be followed for admission of students in medical courses. However, I have not been able to trace any law laid down by the Supreme Court in the said decisions which would stand in the way of declining relief to Sweta, on facts and in the circumstances. 36. Each provides valuable guidance in regard to the strict procedure that is to be followed for admission of students in medical courses. However, I have not been able to trace any law laid down by the Supreme Court in the said decisions which would stand in the way of declining relief to Sweta, on facts and in the circumstances. 36. For the reasons aforesaid, I am of the clear view that this is an appropriate case where the interim order made on September 26, 2014 should be made absolute. Provisional admission of Sweta stands confirmed and steps shall be immediately taken by the Dean, ESIC Medical College at Joka to regularise her admission. The MCI as well as the State shall take note of the same and treat Sweta as a regular student admitted in the ESIC Medical College at Joka as a ward of an insured person availing the said quota. While Sweta shall be entitled to all privileges and concessions as are available to her in law, she shall also be bound to discharge her obligations towards insured persons in need of medical assistance as spelt out above as well as devote herself for the weaker sections of the society. 37. The writ petition stands allowed, without order for costs. Later- After the judgment is pronounced, Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the MCI, has prayed for stay. Opposing such prayer, it is submitted by Mr. Biswas, learned advocate for the petitioners, that they have obtained information through the machinery set up by the Right to Information Act, 2005 of one student having left the medical course at the ESIC Medical College at Joka and two other students having not been allowed to appear at the 1st Professional MBBS Examination, 2015 for lack of attendance. The response to the query received from the Dean, which has been placed before me, shall be retained with the records. It has also been submitted by Mr. Biswas that Sweta has been successful in clearing the 1st Professional MBBS Examination, 2015. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate for the respondents 8 to 12 has not disputed the submissions of Mr. Biswas. Enlargement of intake capacity was one of the grounds on which the prayers made in the writ petition was opposed. Now that one student has left the course, the question of any enlargement does not survive at all. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate for the respondents 8 to 12 has not disputed the submissions of Mr. Biswas. Enlargement of intake capacity was one of the grounds on which the prayers made in the writ petition was opposed. Now that one student has left the course, the question of any enlargement does not survive at all. This is an additional ground for negating the contention raised on behalf of the MCI that admission of Sweta would result in enlargement of the intake capacity. I find no reason to grant stay of operation of the order as prayed for by Mr. Bhattacharya and such prayer is refused.