Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinayak Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 August, 2017
1
W.P. No. 12601/2017 & 12774/2017
24.08.2017
Shri Aditya Sanghi, Shri Greeshm Jain, Shri Dilip
Parihar and Shri Satish Verma for the petitioners.
Shri P. K. Kaurav, learned Advocate General and
Shri Deepak Awasthi for the respondents.
The learned Advocate General for the State prays for and is granted a week's time to file a return.
In view of the urgency of the matter, the parties have argued extensively on the question of interim relief.
The case of the petitioners is that the list of students that had been shown on the website of the CBSE as students belonging to the State of M.P. vide Annexure P-3 has been removed and thereafter on the basis of the domicile certificate students from outside the State of M.P. have been allotted State quota seats. It is submitted that the students from outside the State of M.P. have obtained dual domicile certificate, one from the State where they originally reside and the other from the State of M.P. and on that basis admissions have been granted by the respondents authorities in the first and second round of counselling in respect of which they have filed 2 complaints which have not been looked into.
The learned Advocate General submits that the State shall look into the complaints in respect of false and fabricated domicile certificates filed by the candidates and in case any certificate is found to be false or fabricated, appropriate steps in that regard would be taken by them in accordance with law. He further states that at present in view of the proviso inserted beneath Rule 3(5) of the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavsayik Shikshan Santha (Pravesh ka Viniyaman avam Shulk ka nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as "the Admission Rules") of the State Rules notified in the M.P. Gazette on 7.7.2017, the authorities are taking into consideration the details relating to domicile mentioned by the candidates while registering themselves online for the purposes of counselling and on that basis seats have been allotted.
The learned Advocate General submits that in view of the proviso appended to Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules, admissions are being made which are in accordance with law.
We have extensively heard the learned counsel for the parties on the question of interim relief.
From a perusal of the Admission Rules notified 3 by the State, it is apparent that Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules states that "Abhayarthi Dwara Pravesh Pariksha ke avedan form me Madhya Pradesh Rajya ke sthaniya niwas se sambandhit diya gaya vikalp antim mana jayega". The proviso which has been inserted beneath this Rule by the Gazette notification dated 7.7.2017 provides that in case no information relating to local residence is given in the form filled up for participating in the entrance examination, the candidate will have to furnish information in this regard at the time of registering himself for the purposes of online counselling in the State.
It is also observed that in the information bulletin published by the CBSE for participating in the NEET examination, Clause 5 of the online application form prescribes the information that the candidate is required to furnish, relating to the State to which he belongs as per Appendix 5 that is annexed alongwith the information bulletin. Appendix 5 which has been placed before us relates to the list of codes that are allotted to various States in the country and, therefore, it is apparent that while the candidate is appearing in the NEET examination, he has to give 4 information in respect of the State to which he belongs by mentioning the code of the State to which he belongs. It is also apparent from a perusal of the CBSE guidelines and instructions that the candidate appearing in the NEET examination is required to furnish detailed information in respect of the School from where he has passed, the State to which he belongs, his permanent residence, Adhar Card, etc. When the aforesaid information is read alongwith the specific and clear provision of Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules, it is apparent that the option relating to residence given by the candidate in that form shall be and has to be treated as final for the purposes of local residence and it is only in cases where such information is not available that the proviso appended to the Rules by the notification dated 7.7.2017 comes into operation and the candidate concerned is required to furnish information relating to local residence while registering himself online at the time of counselling. A conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions specifically Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules relating to admission makes it clear that the provisions of law do not envisage or permit a student to have the luxury of obtaining 2 or 3 certificates relating to local 5 residence from different States and to try his luck wherever possible or to block the seats of other eligible candidates by adopting such a tactic.
In view of the aforesaid, and keeping in mind that the last date for admissions is 30 th September 2017, as an interim measure and in view of the undisputed position that the respondent State is required to strictly follow the rules framed by them while making admissions, it is directed that the State authorities shall conduct counselling, draw up the list of candidates eligible under the State quota by taking into consideration and treating as final the option and information regarding the State to which the candidate belongs that has been furnished by him in the NEET form submitted by him and it is made clear that all information given by the candidate in the NEET form in respect of his residence shall be treated as final in terms of Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules and thereafter the authorities shall proceed further in the matter by redrawing the merit list.
It is clarified that the information given by the candidate in respect of the State to which he belongs in accordance with the information bulletin published by the CBSE would be treated as final in terms of the provisions of Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules and 6 only in case such information is not available in the NEET form the respondents shall resort to the proviso to Rule 3(5) of the Admission Rules.
C.C. today.
(R.S. Jha) (Nandita Dubey)
Judge Judge
mms