Delhi High Court - Orders
Dr Susan Rinu Mathew vs National Board Of Examination & Ors on 8 September, 2020
Author: Jayant Nath
Bench: Jayant Nath
$~A-42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6114/2020 & CM APPLs. 21979-80/2020
DR SUSAN RINU MATHEW ... Petitioner
Through Mr.Romy Chacko and Mr.Atul
Shankar Vinod, Advs.
versus
NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATION
& ORS. ... Respondents
Through Mr.Krishna Srinivasan, Adv. for R-6/
CMC Vellore.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
ORDER
% 08.09.2020 This hearing is conducted through video conferencing.
1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking an appropriate direction to the respondent to allot a seat/post to the petitioner in Diplomate of National Board (Pathology) stream in either respondent No.5 or respondent No.6 institutions on the basis of her ranks/score in PG NEET- 2020.
2. The case of the petitioner is that she appeared for the PG-NEET- 2020 examination on 05.01.2020. She qualified in the said exam scoring a rank of 31644. On 16.08.2020, respondent No.1 informed the petitioner that she has been allotted DNB Pathology seat at respondent No.5 according to her rank/score.
3. The petitioner reported physically at respondent No.5/Institution on 18.08.2020 with all requisite documents with effect from the said date i.e. 18.08.2020, the petitioner commenced her academic course with respondent No.5 and has carried all her duties/responsibilities as entrusted upon her.
4. On 30.08.2020, respondent No.6/institution informed the petitioner that she was eligible for MD Pathology seat in the said institution.
5. As the petitioner was keen to join respondent No.6, she resigned from her seat/post with respondent No.5 on 31.08.2020. However, on 02.09.2020 she was informed by respondent No.6 that on account of some on-going litigation, the issue of giving a seat to the petitioner is on hold.
6. Accordingly, on 02.09.2020 the petitioner vide an email requested respondents No.1 and 5 not to give effect to her resignation letter dated 31.08.2020. She has repeated her request to respondents No.1 and 5 on 05.09.2020.
7. It is the grievance of the petitioner that on 04.09.2020 she received an e-mail from respondent No.1 stating that her request to withhold the resignation is not being considered.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that though the resignation letter was sent but the same has never been accepted or acted upon. The original documents of the petitioner are still lying with the respondent No.5/institution. She has already paid the entire fees as required with respondent No.5 which has not yet been refunded. She has physically not joined with respondent No.6 and hence there was no occasion for respondent No.1 to have written the communication dated 04.09.2020 in as much as the petitioner continues to remain the student of respondent No.5.
9. Petitioner has made out prima facie case. Respondents No.1 and 5 are restrained from admitting any other student in the seat which was allotted to the petitioner till the next date of hearing.
10. Issue notice. Learned counsel for respondent No.6 accepts notice. Notice be issued to respondents No.1 to 5, returnable for 18.09.2020.
JAYANT NATH, J.
SEPTEMBER 8, 2020/v