Allahabad High Court
Reeti Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 8 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:159724 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21314 of 2023 Petitioner :- Reeti Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.,Krishna Ji Shukla,Rajni Ojha,Sudhakar Upadhyay,Vaibhav Tripathi Connected with Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18415 of 2023 Petitioner :- Maa Gayatri College Of Pharmacy Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pavan Kishore,Rajni Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Sudhakar Upadhyay,Varun Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1. Heard Smt. Rajni Ojha, along with Shri Pavan Kishore and Shri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Krishna Ji Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No. 4, Shri Sudhakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, Shri Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 and Shri Varun Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel representing the Union of India.
2. These two writ petitions have been filed and the controversy involved therein are identical at least to the extent of facilitating admission to the petitioners of Writ C No. 21314 of 2023 in the Institution i.e. petitioner in Writ C No. 18415 of 2023.
3. Various affidavits have been exchanged in these two matters and they are accompanied by documents. However, to cut short the controversy, issue involved is as to whether the petitioners of Writ C No. 21314 of 2023 could be admitted in Maa Gayatri College of Pharmacy in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.
4. Whereas the case of the College is to the effect that despite 8th round of counselling, two candidates namely, Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar, who had appeared in second round of counselling, did not turn up for admission, these two seats remained locked on the Website of the respondents and, therefore, the College filed writ petition with a prayer that the aforesaid two seats be unlocked so as to facilitate filling up the same by other candidates, who had opted for the same.
5. This Court passed the following order on 31.05.2023 in Writ C No. 18415 of 2023:
"1. Heard Ms. Rajni Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Varun Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appeared for respondent No. 4.
2. The controversy raised by means of the present writ petition is regarding locking and un-locking of seats in the second and eighth round of counseling and the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that two candidates, namely, Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar, though appeared in the second round of counseling did not turn up for admission and, therefore, the two seats are lying vacant, but locked.
3. It is contended that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the Competent Authority for un-locking the seats and today is the last date of filling up of form in relation to the Diploma in Pharmaceuticals and the examination shall commence from 15.06.2023.
4. Put up this case as fresh before the appropriate Bench on 20.07.2023 before the appropriate Bench.
5. All the respondents shall obtain instructions and shall place the same before the Court on the next date of hearing.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall also inform the Court about the outcome of interim mandamus issued by this Court.
7. In the meantime, the two seats, which were not filled up on account of non-turning up of aforesaid two candidates shall be provisionally un-locked for the purposes of registration and facilitating of filling up of form and consequences arising therefrom.
8. However, this permission is being granted as an interim measure, which shall remain subject to final outcome of the writ petition."
6. It is admitted between the parties that till today interim mandamus issued by the Court has not been obeyed, however, the Institution has already facilitated admission to the petitioners of Writ C No. 21314 of 2023.
7. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is to the effect that once the two candidates namely Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar did not turn up, there was no option left with the Institution to fill up the said two seats after adopting proper course. The concerned guidelines governing the admission process have been annexed as Annexure RA-4 to the rejoinder affidavit filed in Writ C No. 18415 of 2023, in which there are provisions for filling up options in different rounds of counselling. Admittedly, the Institution is a private Institution and following clause is meant for such colleges:
"??? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ??????????? ?????????
?? ??? ??? ??????? ?????? ??????? (???????????)-2022 ??? ???????? ??? ??? ???????? ????????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ??, ?? ??????, ???????? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ??????????? ????????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ??????????? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ????, ???? ??????? ?????? ???????- 2022 ??? ???????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???????? ???? ???????? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??????????? ?? ??????????? ???? ??????????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ??????????? ???? ???? 10 ?????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ???????? ??, ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????????? ????????? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??? ????????? ???????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?????? ????
??? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ??????????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ??????????? ?????????? ????? ?????
?????- ??????????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????????? ?????????? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ????? ???????? ??? ??? ????????? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ??? ???????? ???????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???????? ????? ????? ??? ??????, ?????? ???? ??????????? ???????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ??? 3000/- ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?? ????????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???????"
8. It is, therefore, argued that it is under the said procedure that the two students have been allowed admission in the College.
9. Per contra, the submission of Shri Sudhakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 is to the effect that initially Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar had locked the seats in the petitioner-Institution Maa Gayatri College of Pharmacy and since, as per the procedure prescribed under the letter dated 17.10.2022, these two students did not withdraw from the counselling process within the cut off period i.e. on or before 22.10.2022, the respondents were justified in not unlocking the said two seats. The stand is still to the effect that status of those two students shall remain as validly selected/enrolled candidates, unless they withdraw from the process.
10. There is no dispute about the fact that these two students namely, Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar have not yet appeared either before the Institution or before the council in relation to the process, probably for the reason that they might have taken admission somewhere else. Insofar as withdrawal aspect is concerned, the last cut off date has already expired ten months ago and though petitioners Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad were facilitated admission in the petitioner-Institution, they have not been allowed to appear in the examinations.
11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the concerned guidelines filed as Annexure R.A.-4 to the rejoinder affidavit describe step by step procedure for admitting candidates. Insofar as Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad are concerned, the documents annexed to their writ petition show that they had filled up options for taking admission in Maa Gayatri College of Pharmacy and their seats were locked in 8th round of counselling. The dispute in between the parties is to the effect as to whether locking of seats in the counselling process would amount to allotment of seats in the concerned Institution. A clear stand has been taken by respondent No. 3 in paragraph 13 of the counter affidavit, which reads as follows:
"13. That in reply to the contents of paragraph no. 13 of the writ petition it is stated that the candidates Reeti Singh Roll No. 220100366212 and Jamuna Prasad, Roll No. 22100366093 have locked their option, but due to not vacant the place in Maa Gayatri College of Pharmacy, Prayagraj (College Code 4060) reason the admission/allotment could not be possible. The rest averment of this paragraph is related from the records, hence need no comments."
12. Therefore, the stand of the Council is that the seats were never allotted to Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad.
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that one cannot indefinitely wait for those, who do not press their rights either before the Council or before the Institution. Therefore, merely because Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar did not withdraw from their candidature prior to 22.10.2022 or even till today, showing the status of these two seats as still locked denying admission to those who have entered in the Institution in accordance with the guidelines, and who had filled up options and their seats were shown as locked on the concerned website of the respondents, appears to be unjustified.
14. There appears to be some issue with regard to deposit of fees also. Whereas the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the process of locking was completed only after deposit of fees, there are certain reservations expressed by Shri Upadhyay that mere deposit of Rs. 250/- as fees would not suffice admission in the College particularly, when no allotment of seat was done at the level of respondent No. 3.
15. Having perused the record, I find that once Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad have been admitted in the Institution and the Institution has no grievance except that on the concerned website of respondent No. 3 these two seats are still shown as locked and there appears to be no provision in the guidelines visualizing such a peculiar situation, which has arisen in the present case on account of non-withdrawal by the concerned candidates, Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar, who had initially participated in the process, the two seats cannot remain locked for indefinite period of time awaiting those, whose chances to appear are not only bleak, but almost impossible after lapse of such a long period of time.
16. Without making further comments on other legal issues or different clauses of guidelines, in the peculiar facts of the case, the candidature of Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad is under cloud on account of inaction on the part of Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar, this Court disposes of the writ petition in the following terms:
(i) Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad shall be allowed to continue with their studies in Institution-Maa Gayatri College of Pharmacy.
(ii) Respondent No. 3 shall immediately unlock two seats described and depicted in the name of Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar.
(iii) Necessary adjustment shall be immediately made on the concerned website and record showing the admission of Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad in the College.
(iv) If there are certain issues with regard to deposit of fees or fine etc., Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad shall, without fail, deposit the same with the Institution and respondent No. 3 as soon as demand is raised to them.
(v) If the concerned examinations are over, Reeti Singh and Jamuna Prasad shall be allowed to appear in the examinations along with other candidates in the ensuing examinations.
17. This order is subject to any stand that may be taken by Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar in proceedings initiated by them, if any.
18. This order shall not be treated as a binding precedent or an example in other cases.
19. This order has been passed keeping in view the specific stand taken by the petitioner-Institution that Niraj Kumar Pal and Ayush Kumar have neither taken admission nor studied in the Institution nor did they appear in the examinations nor did they deposit fees and have no concern with the Institution.
Order Date :- 8.8.2023 Sazia