Karnataka High Court
Kunal Kiran Waghmare vs Central Seat Allocation Board on 31 October, 2018
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 37078 OF 2018 (EDN-AD)
BETWEEN:
KUNAL KIRAN WAGHMARE
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
MINOR-REPRESENTED BY FATHER
/NATURAL GUARDIAN
SRI KIRAN KUNDALIK WAGHMARE
WAGHMARE BUILDING
LALCHAKKI CHOWK,
STATION ROAD,
ULHASNAGAR-421004
DIST THANE
MAHARASTRA STATE
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S P KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CENTRAL SEAT ALLOCATION BOARD
(C.S.A.B) 2018,
MALAVIYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
JAIPUR 302017
(RAJASTHAN STATE)
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DIRECTOR
2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA
SURATHKAL
P.O.SRINIVASNAGAR
MANGALORE-575025
REPRESENTED BY DEAN (ACADEMIC)
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P S RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. ASHWINI RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATIONS/REPLIES NO: NIL DATED:
23.08.2018 WITH THE WORDS "ADMISSION PROCESS IS
OVER" PERTAINING TO THE ADMISSION OF THE PETITONER
2
IN CIVIL ENGINEERING (4 YEARS BACHELOR OF
TECHNOLOGY) (B-TECH) ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT HEREIN, BEING ARTBITRARTY, ERRONEOUS
OPPOSED TO LAW EQUITY AND JUSTICE AND THE
RELEVANT RULES. (ANNEXURE-R & S);
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioner, a member of Scheduled Caste hailing from the State of Maharashtra, being a candidate with Roll No.25405305 for the Joint Entrance Examination [Main] , 2018, had secured CRL Rank No.52212 and Scheduled Caste Category Rank No.1524. The Joint Seat Allocation Authority, 2018 had allotted to the petitioner a seat at the second respondent-National Institute of Technology, Karnataka, for B-Tech course, in Civil Engineering under "Scheduled Castes-Other States Category". He was provisionally admitted to the course in the said institute on 23.07.2018 on a payment of admission fee of Rs.3,401/- and a hostel admission fee of Rs.25,600/-.
2. In terms of the Business Rules for Joint Seat Allocation for the Academic Programs, 2018-19 that govern the allotment of seats, the first respondent after completion of all JoSSA Rounds, conducted special vacant seats filling rounds i.e., Special Round wherein, the petitioner selected the fourth option "Surrender And Not Participating in Next 3 Round" and consequently, the seat allotted to him in the JoSSA Round stood cancelled and further that the same came to be allotted to one Mr.Kedas Dileep again under the "Scheduled Castes-Other States Category". This fresh candidate was admitted to the course on 06.08.2018 vide Admission No.181901.
3. The petitioner who having opted for loosing the seat, made two representations dated 23.08.2018 and 24.08.2018 for restoration of the lost seat by way of re-admission, inter alia stating that the surrender of the seat was done by mistake. His representation for restoration of the seat and the admission, having not been acceded to, the petitioner has knocked the doors of this court inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to permit him to continue the B-Tech Civil Engineering course in terms of earlier allotment.
4. After service of notice, the respondents entered appearance through their Panel counsel. The second respondent has filed a detailed Statement of Objections resisting the writ petition on various grounds.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a minor by age; he belongs to a Scheduled 4 Caste and he hails from the State of Maharashtra; though he is a meritorious candidate, by sheer mistake and inadvertence, he had pressed the button "Surrender And Not Participating in Next Round" instead of "Surrender And Participating in Next Round"; immediately, he has made representations for retracing the step which ought to have been favoured by the respondents. Alternatively, the learned counsel vehemently submits that even otherwise also, two more seats are available in the second respondent-institute for accommodating the petitioner.
6. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the counsel for the second respondent-Institute submits that the option exercised by the petitioner, by no stretch of imagination be termed as an inadvertent act inasmuch as all information was being displayed on the Display Board/Monitor of the System and only after reading the same, options are exercised by the candidates. Even otherwise also, the counsel submits, that the surrendered seat having been simultaneously allotted to another meritorious candidate under the very same category, cannot be retrieved to the petitioner at all. He denies the availability of any more seats for accommodating the petitioner. The last date for admitting the students against vacancies arising due to any 5 reason was 15.08.2018 and that after the cut-off date, there is a complete legal embargo by the Apex Court. So stating, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior counsel for the second respondent. I have perused the Writ Petition and the Statement of Objections. I have also perused the application filed by the petitioner and the documents produced by him through a Memo.
8. The contention of the petitioner that he had exercised the option "Surrender And Not Participating in Next Round"
by mistake or by inadvertence appears to be too far-fetched inasmuch as the petitioner going by his academic performance apparently is a brilliant student. Secondly, even if it is assumed to be by inadvertence/mistake, still the surrendered seat having been simultaneously allotted to another meritorious candidate who too belongs to the "Scheduled Castes-Other States Category", it is not possible to restore the admission to the petitioner. Granting relief to the petitioner, virtually amounts to robbing off the admission granted to another innocent candidate and this strikes at the root of law, reason and justice. 6
9. The alternate contention that two more seats are available in the second respondent-National Institute of Technology, Karnataka, wherein, the petitioner can be accommodated is not substantiated by the material on record. The second respondent at Para 11 of its Statement of Objections has specifically stated that there is no seat remaining vacant in Civil Engineering under "Scheduled Castes-Other States Category". The effort of the petitioner's counsel to dispel the truth of this assertion of the Institute does not bear fruit.
10. Lastly, the last date for admission i.e., 15.08.2018 having expired, it is impermissible to grant admission to the petitioner even by creating a supernumerary seat, arguably, as held by the Apex Court in the case of Parsvanath Charitable Trust and Others Vs. All India Council for Technical Education and others 2013 (3) SCC 385, which prescribed the following Event Schedule at Para 41:
Event Schedule Conduct of entrance In the month of May examination (AIEEE/State CET/Management quota exams, etc.)
Declaration of result of On or before 5th June qualifying examination (12th exam or similar) and entrance examination 7 1st round of To be completed on or before counselling/admission for 30th June allotment of seats 2nd round of counselling for To be completed on or before allotment of seats 10th July Last round of counselling for To be completed on or before allotment of seats 20th July Last date for admitting 30th July candidates in seats other However, any number of than allotted above rounds for counselling could be conducted depending on local requirements, but all the rounds shall be completed before 30th July Commencement of academic 1st August session Last date up to which 15th August students can be admitted against vacancies arising due to any reason (no student should be admitted in any institution after the last date under any quota) Last date of granting or 10th April refusing approval by AICTE Last date of granting or 15th May refusing approval by University/State Government In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition fails. Interim order granted, if any, stands dissolved.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Snb/