Gujarat High Court
Bharti Gouda vs National Institute Of Design on 13 July, 2023
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10207 of 2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10454 of 2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10917 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL Sd/-
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ? NO
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
YES
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ? NO
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution NO
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
BHARTI GOUDA
Versus
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DESIGN
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIGANT POPAT WITH MS SAMRUDDHI V PAWAR(13069) for the
Petitioner(s) No. 1 in SCA Nos.10207 & 10917 OF 2023
MR MITUL SHELAT APPEARING WITH MS DISHA NANAVATI for Petitioner
No.1 in SCA No.10454 of 2023
MR DG SHUKLA(1998) WITH MS MESHWA H. BHATT for the
Respondent(s) No. 1 (in all the petitions)
SERVED BY RPAD (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
Page 1 of 25
Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023
undefined
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 13/07/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Digant Popat appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Samruddhi Pawar for the petitioners of Special Civil Application Nos.10207 and 10917 of 2023, learned Advocate Mr.Mitul Shelat appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Disha Nanavati for the petitioner in Special Civil Application No.10454 of 2023 and learned Advocate Mr.D.G. Shukla appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Meshwa Bhatt for respondent National Institute of Design in all the petitions. Since the issue involved in this group of petitions is common, and since the petitioners were heard together, this Court deems it appropriate to decide these petitions by way of this common judgement. Since details with regard to individual petitioners may vary, for the sake of convenience, this Court seeks to state details of individual candidates in Chart Form for easy reference.
Name of the Course applied for Rank obtained in NID Qualifying Exam
SCA No. petitioner Entrance Exam
Bharti M.Des. (Design for 7th Rank (All India) & 1st Bachelor's Degree
No.10207 Gouda Retail Experience) Rank (in OBC-NCL in Visual Arts
of 2023 Category) (BVA)
Suraj M.Des. (Information 11th Rank (All India) & 1st B.Tech in
No.10454 Ramjanamra Design) Rank (in OBC-NCL Information
of 2023 m Mourya Category) Technology
Aniruddha M.Des. (Product 4th Rank (All India) & B.Tech in
No.10917 Deshpande Design) Mechanical
of 2023
2. The petitioners are all pursuing their Bachelor Degree and whereas in all the above cases, except in case of petitioner of Special Civil Application No.10207 of 2023, all the petitioners have already appeared in their final year/semester examinations. The respondent National Institute of Page 2 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined Design (hereinafter referred to as 'NID') had invited applications for admission to various Post Graduate Courses for the academic session commencing in the year 2023-24 vide a Notification dated 21.10.2022 and whereas, the petitioners had appeared in the entrance examination being the Design Aptitude Test (DAT) Prelims, which was held in the month of January 2023 and whereas the results were declared in the month of February 2023. Thereafter the Institute had conducted the DAT Main examination and whereas, after clearing the Main examination, the petitioners were given provisional admissions, subject to payment of fees and whereas all the petitioners had deposited the fees as directed by the Institute towards their first Semester fees. It appears that the NID had published an 'Admission 2023-24' Hand-book, which inter alia contains general information with regard to the entrance examination, important dates with regard to admission process, details with regard to various courses and the seats available, the eligibility criteria, applicable reservation, mode of application, details with regard to DAT results and other information.
2.1. It would be relevant for the present purpose to mention here that as per the important dates, provisional admission would be given by first week of June 2023 and whereas in the eligibility criteria as found in the Hand-book it is inter alia mentioned that the candidate must have passed Bachelor Degree examination at the time of document verification tentatively scheduled in May 2023. It is also mentioned that candidates in their final year of Bachelor Degree, whose Universities have not issued final degree certificate before the last date of application are eligible to apply, subject to passing all subjects without any backlog and whereas the candidates were required to submit provisional degree certificate issued by the University at the time of document verification tentatively scheduled Page 3 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined in May 2023. It is also mentioned that candidates, who have not appeared for their final qualifying examination before document verification tentatively scheduled in May 2023 will not be eligible for admission.
2.2. Clause 8.8 of the Hand-book states about documents to be uploaded, whereas such contingency would arise after the allotment of the seat to the candidate. As per the list in the Hand-book, 10 documents were required and whereas as relevant for the present purpose, document at Sr.5 being Semester-wise mark-sheets or consolidated transcript of Graduation/Diploma Programmes issued by the University and Document No.7, Graduation Certificate/Provisional Certificate (if the Graduation Certificate is awaited) issued by the University are relevant for the present purpose.
2.3. It would appear that on 26.5.2023 the NID had sent E-mail to all candidates having provisional admission informing that while relevant documents, including Degree/Provisional Degree Certificates were to be uploaded by 31.5.2023 and whereas since representations from candidates regarding inability to submit Degree/ Provisional Degree Certificates by the said date has been voiced, more particularly since final qualifying examination are yet to be conducted and whereas such representations have been considered by the respondent NID and as an exceptional case, a One-time relaxation was given as regards submission of Degree/Provisional Degree Certificate. The NID had asked the candidates to upload, in lieu of Degree/Provisional Degree Certificate, a self-undertaking as well as a letter on the official letter-head of the College/University, stating that the candidate concerned has appeared/will be appearing Page 4 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined for final qualifying examination with no backlog in the previous years/semesters and the results will be declared by 30.6.2023. The said undertaking as well as the letter on official letter-head were to be endorsed by the candidates as well as the concerned authorities respectively. The said documents were to be uploaded by 31.5.2023. It was further intimated that the candidate will have to submit his/her degree/provisional degree certificate latest by 31.7.2023 and whereas it was also clarified that in case the candidate fails to submit his/her result or clear qualifying examination by 30.6.2023, then the seat will be allotted to the next qualifying candidate.
2.4. It would appear that the candidates could not give the undertaking as well as the certificate from the Institute/University concerned as per the requirement of NID, hence vide E-mail dated 9.6.2023, the provisional admission given to the candidate was cancelled and the seat was allotted to the next candidate. Being aggrieved by this communication that the petitioners have preferred the present group of petitions requesting intervention by this Court.
3. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Digant Popat for petitioners of SCA No.10207 of 2023 and SCA No.10917 of 2023, who would submit that the cut-off date by the NID i.e. of having appeared in the qualifying examination by 30.6.2023 and providing provisional degree certificate/degree certificate by 31.7.2023 is completely arbitrary. Learned Advocate would rely upon revised guidelines on examinations and academic calendar for Universities in view of Covid-19 Pandemic by UGC published in the month of April 2020. Learned Advocate would submit that though the guidelines have been issued in view of the pandemic situation prevailing at the relevant point of time, yet such guidelines are still being followed by other prestigious Institutions. As Page 5 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined per the UGC Guidelines, while the admissions for under-graduate and post graduate programmes for the session 2020-2021 would be completed by 31.8.2020 and whereas the academic session could commence from 1.9.2020 and relevant documents of qualifying examination may be accepted up to 30.9.2020. Learned Advocate would take this Court through admission guidelines of various Institutions, including IIT, Delhi; IIT, Kanpur; National Law University, Bangalore; etc., and would submit that most of the Institutions have their admission programmes aligned with the guidelines of UGC. Learned Advocate would further submit that the petitioners are the members of the Association of Indian Universities and whereas the policies of NID need to be aligned with the policies of other Institutions. Learned Advocate would further submit that the respondent is also a member on the Board of AICTE and whereas even the AICTE inter alia envisages admissions to be granted for fresh admissions much later than the admission process envisaged by the respondent Institute. Learned Advocate would also submit that the petitioner being a prestigious institute should align its admission policy with other Institutes, so as to enable students to have a fair idea about the admission process of all such institutes of repute.
3.1. Learned Advocate would further submit that as such there is no nexus between the aspect of passing of graduation and getting admission with NID, more particularly considering the fact that the entrance examination of NID is much tougher than the examinations that the applicants would be faced or have faced in their graduation and whereas under such circumstances, more particularly since the petitioners have submitted that they do not have any backlog, there would not be any apprehension that the petitioners would not clear the graduation examination.
Page 6 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
3.2. Learned Advocate Mr.Popat would further submit that as far as the respondent NID is concerned, their entrance examination itself is extremely hard and whereas the NID holding such difficult entrance examination is virtually making the aspect of graduation absolutely redundant. Learned Advocate would submit that as such considering the very tough nature of the entrance examination, as such the aspect of passing of the graduation would not have any nexus with the admission process.
3.3. Learned Advocate would submit that the aspect of cut-off date is closely related with public policy and whereas a cut-off date, which does not take into consideration other circumstances, more particularly the aspect of Covid-19 Pandemic which is completely against the public policy.
3.4. As far as petitioner of SCA No.10207 of 2023 is concerned, learned Advocate would submit that the student coming from an interior part of Orissa has managed to clear entrance examination of respondent NID and, therefore, the case of the said student ought to have been considered sympathetically by the Institute, more particularly since the issue of conducting of examination is a matter of policy of the Institute/University in which the petitioner is studying and whereas the petitioner would not have any control over the same.
3.5. Insofar as the petitioner of SCA No.10917 of 2023 is concerned, it is submitted that the certificate by the Institute in which the petitioner is studying clearly states that the results of final semester/year examination will be declared by 30.7.2023 and whereas that would be only a few days beyond the cut-off period Page 7 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined prescribed by the respondent NID and, therefore, the case of the petitioner should also be considered.
3.6. Learned Advocate would further submit that having passed the entrance examination of NID a legitimate expectation has arisen, whereby the students i.e. the petitioners expect that they would be entitled to admission and whereas merely on account of things completely beyond their control, the respondent NID ought not to be permitted to cancel the provisional admission of the petitioners.
4. Learned Advocate Mr.Mitul Shelat appearing with learned Advocate Ms.Disha Nanavati for the petitioner of SCA No.10454 of 2023 would submit that the respondent NID by prescribing a cut-off date more particularly whereby the Institute in which the petitioner is doing his graduation being required to give a certificate that the examination would be held by a particular date and the results would be declared within a particular period is virtually asking the petitioner to do the impossible. Learned Advocate in this regard would rely upon the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Arjun Panditrao Khotkar Vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, reported in (2020) 7 SCC 1, where the Hon'ble Apex Court has inter alia laid down the law that the law would not compel one to do that which one cannot possibly perform. It is submitted that when performance of formalities prescribed by a statute has rendered impossible by circumstances over which the person interested has no control like an act of God, the circumstance will be taken as a valid excuse. Learned Advocate would submit that since the respondent NID has sought the petitioner to do the impossible, under such circumstances this Court may exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to appropriately extend the terms of the provision, which is otherwise Page 8 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined impossible to perform. Learned Advocate would further rely upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Limited Vs. CIT, reported in (2022) 3 SCC 321 and the decision in case of Binani Zinc Limited Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board and Ors., reported in (2009) 11 SCC 244 in support of the very submission.
4.1. Learned Advocate would further reiterate the submission as regards respondent NID being a part of the AICTE and whereas according to learned Advocate Mr.Shelat, the last date up to which first year student could be admitted as per the academic calendar published by AICTE is the 15th September 2023, whereas the respondent Institute, which is otherwise a part of AICTE does not adhere to the very cut-off date.
4.2. Learned Advocate would further refer to Ordnance-6 of the NID Ordinance 2016, more particularly Ordinance 6(2)(ii), whereby candidates, who have appeared for the qualifying examination and whose results have not been declared at the time of application for admission to Master of Design Programme shall also be entitled to appear, subject to the candidate, if selected, be granted provisional admission and shall be required to submit result of qualifying examination on or before the date as may be specified by the Institute, failing which the candidate's admission shall stand cancelled. Learned Advocate would emphasize on the term 'provisional admission' and would submit that the term denotes the eligibility of a candidate to pursue a course in which he is selected, subject to his producing the result of qualifying examination before a particular date and whereas it is submitted that a provisional admission ought not to have been cancelled even before the Page 9 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined academic term starts on the specious ground that the candidate could not submit the result of qualifying examination before a date prescribed by NID, which is otherwise prior to the date when the academic term would commence.
4.3. Learned Advocate would submit that by strictly adhering to the cut-off date candidates like the petitioner, who are otherwise meritorious more particularly the candidates being very high upon the merit list in their respective categories would be denied admission and whereas according to learned Advocate, such sacrifice of merit may not be permitted by this Court. Learned Advocate would further submit that the respondent NID in case after the admission process is over would, if there are vacancies, conduct a spot admission and whereas in such spot admission, more particularly in case of reserved seats, if there are vacancies the cut- off marks would either be reduced or done away with to accommodate the students and whereas in case of the petitioners, though they have cleared the entrance examination with flying colours, yet the petitioners are being denied admission on a very technical ground.
4.4. Learned Advocate Mr.Shelat would further submit that in the present case, if extraordinary discretionary power is used to modify the cut-off, which according to learned Advocate, is not sacrosanct the ultimate beneficiary would be the Institute, since by extending the cut-off, students like the present petitioners would be entitled to get admission, which would ultimately be rewarding merit and wheres if the cases of he petitioners are not considered, then ultimately it would be merit which would be the loser.
Page 10 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
5. This group of petitions is vehemently opposed by learned Advocate Mr.D.G. Shukla appearing on behalf of the respondent NID. Learned Advocate would submit that the petitioners, before applying for appearing in the entrance examination, knew about the entire process as having been stated in the Admissions 2023-24 Handbook in Master of Design Course. Learned Advocate would submit that the eligibility criteria as mentioned in Section 4 of the Handbook inter alia clearly states that the candidates must have passed the Bachelor Degree examination at the time of document verification tentatively scheduled in May 2023. Learned Advocate would submit that while the list of documents at Section 8.8 inter alia requires candidates to upload the Semester-wise mark-sheet or consolidated transcript of Graduation/Diploma Programme issued by the University and also Graduation Certificate/Provisional Graduation Certificate, if the graduation certificate is awaited, issued by the University and whereas the document verification was tentatively scheduled in May 2023. It is submitted by the learned Advocate that having known about the cut-off being tentatively May 2023, the petitioners could now not be permitted to challenge the revised cut-off, which had been notified by the respondent NID, more particularly in the interest of the students at large, to submit an undertaking by the student as well as a letter on the official letter-head of the College/University inter alia stating that the student concerned has appeared in the qualifying examination has no backlog and that the results would be declared by 30.6.2023 and whereas being such undertaking and certificates had to be uploaded by 31.5.2023 and the candidate would be required to submit the Degree/Provisional Degree certificate by 31.7.2023. Learned Advocate would submit that though the later extension of cut-off date had been notified to the students by E-mail on 26.5.2023, yet since the dates were extended for Page 11 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined the benefits of the students, the petitioners, who knew about the requirement of having mark-list as well as degree/provisional degree certificates tentatively by the month of May 2023 could not turn around and question the said decision.
6. Learned Advocate would further submit that as such there is no irrationality in the cut-off prescribed by the respondent NID and whereas the entire purpose is to ensure that academic term is started by the first week of July 2023. Learned Advocate would further submit that extension of cut-off date would be a never ending process, since some students would always find themselves prejudiced upon any cut- off date fixed. Learned Advocate in this regard would submit that in the instant cases also, while the petitioner of SCA No.10917 of 2023 would request that the cut-off date for producing the mark-sheet may be extended after 30.7.2023 when the results are scheduled to be declared by his Institute/University petitioner of SCA No.10454 of 2023 would submit that the cut-off date should be extended after 31.7.2023 for producing the mark-sheet and the petitioner of SCA No.10207 of 2023 would request that the cut-off date be extended up to August 2023. The said request being in line with the certificates issued by the respective Institutions informing the NID as regards declaration of the final Semester/Year result of the petitioner concerned.
6.1. Learned Advocate would further submit that fixing a cut-off date is as per the academic calendar as fixed by the Institute and would be touching upon the autonomy of the Institute and whereas since the cut-off date is not arbitrary on the face of it, this Court may not interfere with the same.
6.2. Learned Advocate Mr.Shukla would also question the
Page 12 of 25
Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023
undefined
maintainability of the present petitions by submitting that vide the impugned orders, the petitioner students had been informed about their provisional admission being cancelled and the seat allotted to the students being allotted to the next eligible candidate. Learned Advocate would submit that in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Institutions concerned, the fact of the admission having been given the next eligible candidate has been clearly mentioned. Learned Advocate would submit that the petitioners in spite of knowing that the admissions have already been cancelled and the seat allotted to them having been allotted to the next eligible candidates are contesting the petitions without joining the candidates, who would be vitally affected in case this Court were to allow these petitions. Learned Advocate would submit that such non-joinder of necessary party being vital to the maintainability of the petition itself, this Court may reject the petitions only on the ground of necessary party having not been joined.
7. Learned Advocate would insofar as the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, contend that the academic calendar of UGC was for the period during the Covid-19 Pandemic and whereas such proposed calendar could not be brought into effect for questioning the academic calendar as prescribed by respondent NID. It is further submitted that having a Bachelor Degree is a prerequisite for being eligible for admission in the Master of Design Course and whereas the same could never be treated as an aspect which does not have any nexus with the admission process of the Institution, nor could the candidates claim that merely by passing the entrance examination the candidates would have a legitimate right for being admitted in the Institute even without having the primary eligibility i.e. of having a Bachelor Degree. Learned Advocate would further submit that the aspect of doctrine of Page 13 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined impossibility as attempted to be submitted could not be invoked in this case since out of large number of admissions given by the respondent NID, it is only a very few candidates i.e. the present petitioners, who have questioned the cut-off date. Learned Advocate would submit that the fact of majority of the students not finding it impossible to comply with the condition of getting a certificate from the Institute in which they are presently undergoing their Bachelor Course would establish that the condition was not an impossible condition. Even otherwise it is submitted by the learned Advocate that invoking of doctrine of impossibility in cases of the present nature may not be permitted, more particularly since the issue of producing mark-sheet of graduation and a degree certificate are not impossible conditions, rather the impossibility is with regard to producing the same by a certain date, and whereas the petitioners could well appear for the entrance examination for the next academic year and if found eligible could claim admission by applying complying with the conditions of having mark-sheet of graduation as well as the degree certificate. Under such circumstances, learned Advocate would request this Court not to interfere in the cut-off dates as prescribed by respondent Institution.
8. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties, who have not contended anything further.
9. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties, the issue which arises for consideration of this Court is whether the cut-off as prescribed by NID for providing the mark-sheet as well as the provisional admission certificate is required to be interfered with or not. It would be profitable to note at this stage that the law with regard to interference in cut-off dates has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Shikhar and Anr. Vs. National Board of Examinations and Others, Page 14 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 425, in which decision the Hon'ble Apex Court was considering a case Institute by doctors, who were aspirants of NEET-PG 2022 and who had challenged the date-line stated for completion of internship for appearing in NEET-PG 2022. Paragraphs 12 to 16 being relevant for the present purpose are reproduced herein below for benefit:-
"12. Whenever a cut-off is extended, some students are likely to fall on the other side of the dividing line. In State of Bihar v. Ramjee Prasad6, the State had prescribed that applicants applying for the post of Assistant Professors must have three years of experience. In the preceding year, the cut-off date for the receipt of applications was set 6 (1990) 3 SCC 368 in June, however, in the year in question, the date was fixed in January making certain candidates ineligible owing to their failure to meet the three-year requirement. This Court held that the cut-
off date cannot be held to be arbitrary unless it is shown that it is unreasonable, capricious or whimsical even if no reasons are forthcoming as to the choice of date. This Court observed thus:
"8. In the present case as pointed out earlier the past practice was to fix the last date for receipt of applications a month or one and a half months after the date of actual publication of the advertisement. Following the past practice the State Government fixed the last date for receipt of applications as January 31, 1988. Those who had completed the required experience of three years by that date were, therefore, eligible to apply for the posts in question. The respondents and some of the intervenors who were not completing the required experience by that date, therefore, challenged the fixation of the last date as arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It is obvious that in fixing the last date as January 31, 1988 the State Government had only followed the past practice and if the High Court's attention had been invited to this fact it would perhaps have refused to interfere since its interference is based on the erroneous belief that the past practice was to fix June 30 of the relevant year as the last date for receipt of applications. Except for leaning on a past practice the High Court has not assigned any reasons for its choice of the date. As pointed out by this Court the choice of date cannot be dubbed as arbitrary even if no particular reason is forthcoming for the same unless it is shown to be capricious or whimsical or wide off the reasonable mark. The choice of the date for advertising the posts had to depend on several factors, e.g. the number of vacancies in Page 15 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined different disciplines, the need to fill up the posts, the availability of candidates, etc. It is not the case of anyone that experienced candidates were not available in sufficient numbers on the cut-off date. Merely because the respondents and some others would qualify for appointment if the last date for receipt of applications is shifted from January 31, 1988 to June 30, 1988 is no reason for dubbing the earlier date as arbitrary or irrational. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the High Court was clearly in error in striking down the government's action of fixing the last date for receipt of applications as January 31, 1988 as arbitrary." (emphasis supplied)
13. Recently in Hirandra Kumar v. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad & Anr. 7, a two-judge Bench of this Court, of which one of us (DY Chandrachud, J) was a part held that the cut-off date or an age limit does not become arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution merely because certain candidates fall on the wrong side 7 (2020) 17 SCC 401 of it. A cut-off date or an age bar would always exclude some candidates. This Court emphasised that the determination of the cut-off date is within the sphere of the executive and the court cannot assume that function. This Court observed:
"21. The legal principles which govern the determination of a cut-off date are well settled. The power to fix a cut- off date or age-limit is incidental to the regulatory control which an authority exercises over the selection process. A certain degree of arbitrariness may appear on the face of any cut-off or age-limit which is prescribed, since a candidate on the wrong side of the line may stand excluded as a consequence. That, however, is no reason to hold that the cut-off which is prescribed, is arbitrary. In order to declare that a cut-off is arbitrary and ultra vires, it must be of such a nature as to lead to the conclusion that it has been fixed without any rational basis whatsoever or is manifestly unreasonable so as to lead to a conclusion of a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
27....the validity of the Rule cannot be made to depend on cases of individual hardship which inevitably arise in applying a principle of general application. Essentially, the determination of cut-off dates lies in the realm of policy. A court in the exercise of the power of judicial review does not takeover the function for itself. Plainly, it Page 16 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined is for the rule-making authority to discharge that function while making the Rules."
14. In the present case, cogent reasons have been provided as to why the deadline for completing the internship cannot be extended. An extension of the cut-off any further would result in the disruption of the educational schedule, as indicated to the Court by the Additional Solicitor General. Moreover, students who have qualified in terms of the cut-off of 31 July 2022 will be prejudiced by the inevitable postponement of the schedule. Hence, it would not be appropriate for this Court to issue any such direction. The alternative prayer for the inclusion of the period of Covid duties in the internship requirements would also involve this Court in micro-managing the curriculum for the completion of medical courses. This is a function which, in our view, should not be assumed by the Court. Hence, though hardship has been caused to those students whose internship commenced much later, it would not be possible, at this stage, to disturb the schedule as it would affect the other students who fulfill the cut-off date of 31 July 2022.
15. The petitioners have sought to rely on an order of this Court in Poulami Mondal & Ors. v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences & Ors. 8 where the Institute of National Importance Combined Admission Test (INI CET) for admission to the Post Graduate courses for the July 2021 session was directed to be postponed by this Court. The consideration that weighed with this Court, inter alia, was that owing to the lockdown in several states, it would have been virtually impossible for candidates to reach the examination centres. Further, it was observed that many of the doctors who would be appearing for the examination were exposed to Covid-19 and would have to quarantine and isolate themselves. There was also an apprehension that conducting the examination at that time could lead to the spread of the virus. The relevant observations are reproduced below:
"The attention of the court has also been drawn to news reports of extensions of lock down, in many States. It is reported that in Odisha lock down has been extended till 16th June, 2021. In Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh and also in Kolkata, the lock down has been extended till Page 17 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined 15th June, 2021. It would be extremely difficult, if not virtually impossible for many candidates for the INI CET to reach their examination centres from their places of duty. Many of the doctors are exposed to and are running the risk of contracting Covid 19 and they may have to isolate and/or quarantine themselves. Even otherwise holding the INICET on 16th June, 2021 will result in spread of the virus and increase in Covid19 cases.
Having regard to the circumstances, pleaded, fixing of the INI CET on 16.06.2021 is arbitrary and discriminatory, more so since other important examinations including Joint Entrance Examinations, Board Examinations etc. have been postponed.
The impugned notice is, therefore, set aside. The INI CET is directed to be postponed by at least a month from 16th June, 2021."
16. The factual matrix that led to the postponement of INI CET was completely different from the present circumstances. Crucially, the case dealt with conducting of an examination during a pandemic where strict lockdowns were in place. It did not relate to 8 Writ Petition (s) (Civil) No(s). 623 of 2021 fixing of a cut-off date, which is bound to exclude some aspirants and include others. The law is clear that such exclusion will always be incidental to fixing of any cut-off date and cannot be termed arbitrary."
10. From the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court as above, it would appear that a cut-off date cannot be held to be arbitrary unless it is shown that it is unreasonable, capricious, or whimsical, even if no reasons are forthcoming as to the choice of date. The Hon'ble Apex Court had further observed that the power to fix cut off date is incidental to the regulatory control, which the authority concerned exercises over the selection process and whereas even if a candidate may be excluded on account of the cut off date the same may not by itself be adequate to declare that the cut off prescribed was arbitrary. The Hon'ble Apex Court had laid down the dictum that in order to declare cut off as Page 18 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined arbitrary it must be of such a nature as leading to a conclusion that it had been fixed without any rational basis whatsoever or is manifestly unreasonable, which would lead to a conclusion of being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
10.1. Considering the case on hand, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it would appear that the cut off prescribed would not be arbitrary. As it is it would appear that the Institute appears to have at the first instance addressed the concern of a section of students by extending the tentative time line for having the qualification i.e. by May 2023 as provided in the admission hand- book. It would appear that while the admission handbook clearly states that the students should have mark-sheet of graduation and also have degree/provisional degree certificate as the case may be by May 2023, yet the respondent NID had taken a decision to extend the time-line in three parts. It would appear that in the first part candidates were required to submit an undertaking that they have appeared for the final semester examination without any backlog or they would be appearing for the final semester/year examination in the month of June 2023 without any backlog and the results would be declared by 30.6.2023. A certificate with the same contents was required from the Institute concerned where the students were doing their graduation. Such undertaking and certificate were required to be provided by the students by 31.5.2023, that being the first cut-off. The second cut off being that the results of the final year/semester examination would declared by 30.6.2023 and the third cut off being that the candidate would have to submit degree/provisional degree certificate by 31.7.2023. It would, thus, appear that concern of students, who had appeared and were awaiting their results or who would appear and in whose cases results would be declared within a Page 19 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined reasonable period of time and all students who have either appeared or would appear but who may not have degree or provisional degree certificate within a short span of time had been addressed. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners have failed to show as to how the cut-off date is either unreasonable or capricious or whimsical. The petitioners have also not been able to show that there is any irrationality in the cut off prescribed. In the considered opinion of this Court, the tests having been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court for declaring a cut off as being arbitrary being any of the four requirements as above being shown by the petitioners is not fulfilled.
10.2. It would further appear that the cut off dates as prescribed are co- relatable to the academic calendar of the Institution and, in any case, it would appear that the Institution has extended the cut-off date, more particularly to ensure that to mitigate hardships to majority of candidates. It would be further pertinent to note that it is only a few candidates, who have approached this Court and it is not the contention of the petitioners that there are large number of students, who have been affected by the cut off date prescribed by the respondent NID. As observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above decision, merely because some candidates fall on the wrong side of the cut off date, the cut off date does not become arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Considering the same, this Court finds that there is no irrationality in the cut off date prescribed by respondent Institution.
10.3. Insofar as the contentions of the learned Advocates for the petitioners that the respondent NID is required to align itself to the academic calendar of UGC appears to be without any basis, more Page 20 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined particularly since it appears that the UGC guidelines were applicable during the Covid-19 Pandemic period and whereas it would further appear that the UGC had only suggested an academic schedule which could be followed by the Universities concerned. It would further be required to be observed that the UGC itself at Clause 8 of the guidelines has inter alia given the discretion to the Universities to adopt these guidelines or to make alterations or modifications in the best interest of the students, educational institutions and the entire education system. Furthermore, it would also appear that the petitioners have also not pointed out as to how the guidelines, which though are directory in nature could be made applicable to the present Institution which is stated to be an Institution declared as "the Institute of National Importance".
The above observations also would apply mutatis mutandis the submissions with regard to academic calendar as prescribed by AICTE.
10.4. As regards the submission that the requirement of producing a Bachelor Degree may not have any nexus with the admission process, the same cannot be in any manner countenanced inasmuch as the primary requirement in the general understanding for availing admission in Master's Degree would be to have completed a Bachelor Degree. Furthermore, and even otherwise, the respondent NID in its admission handbook, at Section 4 as regards eligibility criteria for applying to Master of Design Programme, as far as applicable to the present case is clearly stated that the candidate should have passed the Bachelor Degree Examination. Irrespective of the very stringent examination which may have been devised by respondent NID, it could not be stated that a student is not required Page 21 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined to pass the Bachelor Degree Examination and the requirement of respondent NID of seeking degree/provisional degree certificate before a particular date would not have any nexus with the admission process.
10.5. Insofar as the submission that a student having passed the entrance examination acquires a legitimate expectation for being admitted in the Institute, in the considered opinion of this Court, such legitimate expectations would always be subject to the restrictions as regards eligibility etc., as prescribed by the Institute. In case of a candidate who has not even appeared for the final year/semester graduation she would be entitled to appear in the examination but at the same time the admission would be confirmed only upon the student producing valid proof of having cleared the graduation examination within the time stipulated by the Institute concerned. Such a restriction as noted above not being arbitrary, the doctrine of legitimate expectation would be subject to the same. Again merely passing of an entrance examination by itself would not entail any legitimate exception accrued in favour of the candidate concerned if as per the requirement of the Institute, the candidate is required to fulfill other criteria of eligibility. To this Court, if such a submission is even considered, then it would go against the interest of the students community at large, since the most reasonable and possible outcome of such a consideration would be that the Institute would not permit students, who having not completed their graduation to appear in the entrance examination at all. Such a scenario would not be in the interest of the student community at large. Again, it would be worth noting that in the admission Handbook, at Section 8.7 the respondent NID has very clearly stated that obtaining a rank in the merit list does not guarantee admission to Page 22 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined the discipline of choice of the student and that if the candidate fails to report with requisite documents as per the schedule, it will lead to forfeiting of the candidate's seat, which would be allotted to the next eligible candidate. It would appear that the same scenario has occurred here, inasmuch as since the candidates have not been able to documents as directed by the respondent Institution, their allotment of seats has been cancelled and their seats have been allotted to the next eligible candidates. Having regard to the above observations, the said submission also would not be countenanced.
10.6. Insofar as the submission regarding doctrine of impossibility, in the considered opinion of this Court, a proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, is undoubtedly having the force of law but the same would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the issue which was being considered and whereas a doctrine cannot be stated to have general applicability divorced of the context in which it was laid down. A requirement of getting eligibility before a cut off date prescribed for acquiring qualifications cannot be in any manner co-relatable to the doctrine of impossibility since the requirement of passing of qualifying examination would be the primary requirement, the same could not be impossible exercise and whereas neither the petitioners are contending it to be so. The issue of cut off dates, would be relatable to the autonomy of the Institution which prescribes dates to suit its academic calendar and whereas not falling within the cut off dates as prescribed would not amount to the Institute stated to be asking for the impossible, more particularly when the candidate would be eligible to compete in the very entrance for the next academic year. In the considered opinion of this Court, the doctrine as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court would not have any applicability in the facts of the present case and, Page 23 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined therefore, also the said submission cannot be countenanced.
10.7. Insofar as the submission that grant of provisional admission to students as per the Ordinance of NID would entail the candidate getting an opportunity to continue with the academic course and whereas the provisional admission could not have been cancelled before the respondent NID had started the academic session. In the considered opinion of this Court, the said submission is fallacious, inasmuch as Ordinance 6(2)(ii) which has been relied upon by the learned Advocate for the petitioners inter alia envisaging that even candidates, who have appeared for the qualifying examination and whose results have not been declared at the time of application to admission for Master of Design Programme shall also be eligible to apply for the said programme and whereas the proviso states that such candidates, if selected, shall be granted provisional admission and shall be required to submit the result of the qualifying examination. The said proviso further goes on to state that the result would have to be submitted before the date as may be prescribed by the Institution, failing which the admission would stand cancelled. In the considered opinion of this Court, the proviso cannot be read to mean that by giving provisional admission, any right is accrued in favour of the candidate to start the academic session, rather read as a whole, it would clearly imply that while the candidate would be entitled for getting provisional admission, but the same would be subject to the candidate providing result of qualifying examination before the date as prescribed by the NID and whereas failure to submit the result of qualifying examination before the prescribed date would result in the admission being cancelled. In the considered opinion of this Court, the admission is subject to the condition prescribed as noted herein above and it would not, in any Page 24 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/10207/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined manner, confer any right upon the student to contend that the student be permitted to start the academic session. Having regard to the above, the said submission also would not advance the cause of the petitioner.
10.8. Having regard to the above discussion, observations, and findings, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitions being meritless are hereby rejected. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.
Sd/-
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) V.V.P. PODUVAL Page 25 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:17:10 IST 2023