Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ayushi Saraogi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 August, 2019
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Writ Petition No.14736/2019
(Ayushi Saraogi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)
- 1 -
Jabalpur, Dated : 19-08-2019
Ms. Manjit P.S. Chuckal, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri Himanshu Mishra, learned Government Advocate
for the respondents/State.
Heard on I.A. No.9226/2019 for amendment as well as on I.A.No.10123/2019 filed by the respondents for vacating the interim order, whereby this Court has directed the authorities to keep one seat of General category in the MBBS course vacant till hearing the other side.
As the counselling is in process and as the respondents have already filed a return, looking to the urgency in the matter and with the consent of the parties, the matter is heard and decided finally.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner by treating her as a General category candidate and for a further direction to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.7.2019.
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner appeared in the NEET 2019 examination for the purposes of obtaining admission in the MBBS course. It is alleged that the petitioner belongs to the Jain community and, therefore, she obtained a certificate to the effect that she belongs to a minority community. It is stated that while filling up the NEET admission form as well as subsequently the registration form, the petitioner mentioned that she belongs to the OBC category. It is stated that the petitioner has secured 507 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.14736/2019 (Ayushi Saraogi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)
- 2 -
marks out of 720 marks with an All India Rank of 45426 and is likely to get admission in several colleges. It is stated that though the petitioner has obtained 507 marks, she was not short-listed by the respondents by treating her as an OBC candidate.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed a certificate indicating that she belongs to a minority community. It is stated that no certificate to the effect that she belongs to the OBC category was filed by the petitioner. It is stated that the mention of the OBC category in the admission form as well as in the registration form was an inadvertent mistake and in such circumstances, as the petitioner actually belongs to the General category, the respondents be directed to ignore the mistake made by the petitioner in filling up the forms and by mentioning that she belongs to the OBC category and to direct them to treat her as a General category candidate and grant her admission.
The respondents have filed a return in which they have stated that as per the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Medical Education Admission Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 2018'), notified under the provisions of Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sansthan (Pravesh avam Shulk and Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007, a candidate is required to furnish correct information in the admission form as well as in the registration form. It is stated that an opportunity to correct any mistake was also granted to the candidates. It is submitted that as per the provisions of Rule 6 of the aforesaid rules, the information given in the admission form THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.14736/2019 (Ayushi Saraogi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)
- 3 -
and the registration form shall be treated as final and no change or amendment in the same would be permitted after registration which is undertaken before commencement of counselling.
It is submitted that apart from the fact that the petitioner furnished wrong information in the NEET form, she did not make any correction in this regard even at the time of registration for the counselling. It is submitted that it is only when the petitioner found that she had obtained good marks and was likely to get admission on her own merits that she had sought change and correction in the form which is not permissible in view of the provisions of Rule 6 of the Rules of 2018, which strictly prohibits change or amendment in the information given in the registration form after the last date for registration. It is submitted that in such circumstances, as the petitioner has herself stated and mentioned that she belongs to the OBC category, she has been treated as such and her admission would be considered only in that category. It is stated that the aforesaid mistake either inadvertent or deliberate, as the case may be, cannot be ignored as prayed for by the petitioner.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at length, we are of the considered opinion that sanctity of the entire admission process will be maintained only when the authorities strictly follow the provisions of the rules. A perusal of the provisions of Rule 6 of the Rules of 2018, makes it abundantly clear that the information filled up by the candidate at the time of registration would be final and will not be permitted to be changed or amended later on.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.14736/2019 (Ayushi Saraogi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)
- 4 -
The aforesaid rule is of significance and is mandatory. We are constrained to say so, as in case the said rule is interpreted liberally and the authorities are permitted to change the information mentioned by the candidate in the registration form, that would lead to chaos in the admission process and would also permit unscrupulous persons to misutilize the provisions of the Rules violating the sanctity of process of admission.
In the circumstances, as the petitioner who was given two chances to rectify any mistake in the form filled up by her or in the information entered by her at the time of registration, cannot now be permitted to turn around and seek a direction that she be treated as a General category candidate, moreso, as she failed to avail of the said opportunities and correct the mistake. Even otherwise it is unimaginable as to how or why a candidate who belongs to the General category would fill up the form by mentioning that the candidate belongs to the OBC category, unless and until the petitioner had the intent of misusing the process on the strength of a minority certificate obtained by her.
In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in the petition nor do we find any merit in the prayer made by petitioner for a direction to the respondent authorities to violate their own rules, mainly Rule 6. We are of the considered opinion that this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot direct the authorities to violate their own rules as nothing could be more subservient to the Rule of law.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Writ Petition No.14736/2019 (Ayushi Saraogi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)
- 5 -
In the circumstances, we find no merit in the petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed.
Interim order granted by this Court is vacated. It goes without saying that the seat that has been kept vacant by the authorities in view of the interim order passed by this Court may be filled-up by the authorities strictly in accordance with the Rules within two days.
Certified copy as per rules today.
(R. S. JHA) (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
pp.
Digitally signed by
PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2019.08.26
10:29:15 +05'30'