Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 102 (GUJ)

Garasiya Tarunsinh Amarsinh v. State Of Gujarat

2021-02-05

BIREN VAISHNAV

body2021
ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. Apurva R. Kapadia, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP for the respondent - State, Mr. Pratik Jasani, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and Mr. Rohan Lavkumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 through Video Conferencing. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus seeking a direction to the State Authorities to permit the petitioner to fill up forms for getting admission in Diploma of Pharmacy in Government grant-in-aid colleges, by offline mode. 3. The case of the petitioners is that they had completed their HSC in the year 2020 and 2019. Based on the Bachelor of Pharmacy in Diploma Rules, according to the petitioners the department started the procedure for admission to the students in Diploma in pharmacy in Gujarat. According to the petitioners, the admission process started somewhere in the month of August, 2020 and the petitioners like many others could not register themselves via online mode since they were not aware that their registration was a prerequisite of it being done online. As argued by the petitioners through Mr. Kapadia, learned counsel, self financed colleges were given three rounds to admit students apart online process. More than 100 seats are lying vacant in the college. If the benefit of offline admission is given to the self financed colleges after three rounds of admission, Mr. Kapadia would submit that there is no reason why the Government grantinaid colleges cannot be granted the same benefit. According to the petitioners, there are several others who are willing to and available for admissions, and if the benefit is granted for offering them admissions through offline mode, the petitioners will be spared the compulsion of seeking admission to more expensive courses through self financed colleges. 4. Mr.Kapadia, learned counsel would draw the attention of the Court to the averments made in the rejoinder and to the advertisement pre 2020 wherein the benefits of offline admission was granted even to the Government grant in aid college and even to the students who had not registered online on deposit of an amount of Rs.350/. This benefit of offline process was granted even if the admission process was over. This benefit of offline process was granted even if the admission process was over. He would submit that atleast in 8 Government grant in aid colleges, number of seats are vacant and, therefore, especially when the list as per the rejoinder shows that 100 seats are vacant in the M.N. College of Pharmacy, Khambhat, the benefit ought to be granted to the petitioners. 5. Mr. Rohan Lavkumar, learned counsel appeared for the respondent No.3. He invited the attention of the Court to the affidavit in reply filed by one Dr. R.K. Gajjar, Principal, L.D. College of Engineering and Member Secretary, Admission Committee for professional courses. He would submit that the admission process for the students entering the academic year 2020-21 is now completed. In any case, the petitioner not having registered with the ACPC for admissions between August till October, 2020, is not eligible for admission for the seats in Government institutions or grant in aid institutions. He would invite the attention of the Court to the provisions of the Regulations for Admission Rules, 2020 notified on 7.7.2020. Specific attention was invited to Rule 4 which provided for seats available for admission. The category was bifurcated in (A) Government Seats (B) Management Seats. Even 50% of the total sanctioned seats in the Management Quota was to be filled under the aegis of the ACPC. He has further invited the attention of the Court to Rule 13 of the Rules to submit that the process/procedure for admission to Government seats is prescribed thereunder and it is only an online procedure in the following manner; The manner is set out in sub clause (1) to (7) of Rule 14. 14. ADMISSION PROCEDURE: “A. Government Seats: (1) The admission committee shall prepare merit list of the eligible candidates as per these Rules, after verification of the documents submitted online by the candidates. (2) The merit lists shall be displayed on the website of the Admission Committee and by such other means, as the Admission Committee may consider convenient. (3) The Admission Committee shall publish the schedule of online counseling program on its website, by advertisement in the prominent newspapers widely circulated in the State, and by such other means, as it may consider convenient. (4) The candidate shall be required to indicate his order of choices of courses and colleges or institutions, online. (3) The Admission Committee shall publish the schedule of online counseling program on its website, by advertisement in the prominent newspapers widely circulated in the State, and by such other means, as it may consider convenient. (4) The candidate shall be required to indicate his order of choices of courses and colleges or institutions, online. Allotment of seats shall be made on the basis of merit, category of the candidate and availability of seats. The allotment of seats shall be published on the website of the Admission Committee. The candidates shall be required to obtain the print out of the Information letter and bank receipt copies from the website. (5) The candidates shall be required to pay such fee, as may be determined by the Admission Committee. (6) On payment of token tuition fees as required, either online payment or in the branches of banks as specified, the admission allotted to the candidate shall get confirmed. The candidate shall be required to login to his account to get the print out of the Admissions Slip. In case, the candidate fails to pay the token tuition fees within the prescribed time limit as aforesaid, the admission offered to him shall be treated as cancelled. Such candidate shall not be eligible to get admission on same course and same shift in the same institute in subsequent round of counseling. Provided that a candidate who has been allotted admission on NonTFW seat and he has not confirmed his admission to the said seat shall be eligible to get admission on TFW seat on same course and same shift in the same institute (7) Where considerable number of seats fall vacant and it appears to the Admission Committee to fill the vacant seats, it may conduct the admission process for readjustment (reshuffling) of seats. The candidate, who opts to participate in reshuffling process, shall be considered for such admission. The candidate may either give option for upgradation of choices already given or submit new choices. If the candidate gets the admission on the basis of upgradation or new choice, then his earlier admission shall be treated as cancelled.” 6. Mr. Rohan Lavkumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 would invite the attention of the Court to Rule 19 in context of the arguments of Shri Kapadia of the discretion to fill vacant seats through offline mode. Mr. Rohan Lavkumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 would invite the attention of the Court to Rule 19 in context of the arguments of Shri Kapadia of the discretion to fill vacant seats through offline mode. Inviting the attention of the Court to the Rules 2020, Mr. Rohan Lavkumar relied on the old Rules and would submit that under the old Rules after offering admission to all the candidates whose names appear in the merit list or after completion of the admission process, such vacant seats shall be filled by the institution in accordance with the directions of the Admission Committee as prescribed in sub rule (2) of Rule 19. In other words, the option of filling in the seats with the institution is under the old rule. The Rules of 7.7.2020, only prescribe for online Admission. 7. Mr. Rohan Lavkumar would further invite the attention of the Court to the contents of the reply and submit that the first merit list was published in accordance with Rule 11 on 1.10.2020. The Display of Vacancies on the ACPC website was on 15.10.2020. As a result of the pandemic, the reregistration which was otherwise closed was reopened between 15.10.2020 till 19.10.2020. Therefore, in addition to the two extensions granted earlier, the 3rd extension was granted. 8. It is the case of the Committee that the petitioners have not even registered with he ACPC and, therefore, the benefit of offline admissions on the Government aided seats cannot now be offered to the candidates. Even the online admission choice filling/cancellation to the vacant seats was denied from 7th to 8th December, 2020 and all admissions for Government seats stand closed on 14.1.2021. 9. Considering the contentions raised by the respective parties, as far as the contention of Shri Kapadia that the benefit of offline admission ought to be given to the students for the purposes of securing admissions to the Government grant-in-aid colleges with a reliance on the advertisement (Page 103 to 106) is concerned, when viewed in context of the notification of the amended Rules dated 7.7.2020 particularly, when read in context of Rule 14 together with the admission process and reservation of seats for Government seats and management seats, the only process or a medium to secure admission to Government seats is through online procedure. Even, as far as the management seats are concerned, the process is through online mode for the various quota that comes within the Government seats. The advertisement relied on by Mr. Kapadia is in the context of the unamended Rules, 2013 whereas now on 7.7.2020, new Rules have come into place. There is no method by which an offline process can be used to secure admission in Government colleges. The argument therefore of giving the benefit in a similar manner as was given to the self financed institutions will have to be negated. 10. It is also clear from reading Rule 19 which provides for vacant seats that such vacant seats also have to be filled in through an online process. 11. From the time line which is evident and the contents made out in the affidavit-in-reply, it is clear that not only did the petitioners at the first instance not register themselves for online process, however, even when extensions were granted due to the pandemic and the process of registration was reopened, the petitioners failed to take such benefit. The fact that the registration is online was well made aware through the information brochure detailing the admission process published on the ACPC Website. Moreover, the petitioners have approached this Court in December, 2020/January, 2021, after the entire admission process was over in December, 2020 after three extensions. 12. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners and grant them the benefit of permitting their admissions through an offline mode in Government grant-in-aid college. 13. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed and the same stands dismissed with no order as to costs. Notice is discharged.