Disposed

Shaheed Narendra Kumar Ayurvedic Medical College and R.K.M.S. Charitable Hospital v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2019WRIC/23634/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court dismissed the petitioner institution's writ petition seeking regularization of illegal admissions made without due process or merit. The Bench held that merit cannot be compromised in medical admissions and dismissed the claim for the benefit of equity, while noting students may seek compensation from the college. (para 34)

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed; the institution cannot regularize illegal admissions made without merit.

Shaheed Narendra Kumar Ayurvedic Medical College… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23634 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shaheed Narendra Kumar Ayurvedic Medical College And R.K.M.S. Charitable Hospital Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitin Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Mohit Singh

¶2

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶3

Parcha filed today by Shri S.N. Chauha, Advocate on behalf of respondent no.5, is taken on record.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶5

The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-

¶6

"(i) issue a writ order, or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 5.7.2019 (Annexure No.22 to this instant writ petition) passed by the Director, Aryurved (Syllabus & Evaluation), Department of Ayush, Government of U.P., Lucknow (Respondent No.2).

¶7

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to approve/regularize the list of 36 students admitted by the petitioner in 1st year BAMS Course Examination (Academic Batch 2017-18).

¶8

(iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the 36 students admitted by the petitioner institution to appear in the ongoing 1st year BAMS Course Examination (Academic Batch 2017-2018) alongwith Practicals and declare the result thereof.

¶9

(iv) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to hold supplementary examinations/special examinations for the left over papers of the 1st Year BAMS Course Examination (Academic Batch 2017-18) of the 36 students admitted by the petitioner and declare the results thereof.

¶10

(v) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the students admitted by the petitioner in BAMS Course Batch 2017-18 to pursue their BAMS programme as per schedule in the petitioner institution."

¶11

The petitioner - Institution namely Shaheed Narendra Kumar Aryurvedic Medical College was granted permission by the Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (AYUSH) on 14.8.2017 for 60 seats in UG, BAMS course under Section 13 A of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970.

¶12

The University of Lucknow conducted Combined Pre-Ayush Test (CPAT) for the Academic Session 2017-18 and also held councelling for admission of various AYUSH Courses. The petitioner - Institution was also one of the approved private Ayurvedic College for the purpose of counselling.

¶13

The result of the CPAT was declared on 10.10.2017 and the process of counselling was completed after extending the last date on 29.11.2017. The petitioner - Institution received only two students from the first round of counselling and three

¶14

students from the Mop Up round of counselling, and as such, only five students were sent to the institution after the counselling. These five students got admission in the institution.

¶15

The institution which has sanctioned/approved intake of 60 seats communicated the authorities to permit the institution to fill up the 55 vacant seats. However, without receiving any permission to this effect, the institution proceeded with the process to take direct admissions, and for that, advertisement dated 28.11.2017 was published for calling the students to take admissions before the cut off date i.e. 29.11.2017. In pursuance of said advertisement, 55 students were admitted and they have deposited their fees. At present, only 36 students out these 55 students are continuing their studies in the Institution. It is admitted case that the said 55 students (out of which presently 36 students are studying) were not from the merit list of the CPAT. A list of all these students was also sent to the authorities but not approved.

¶16

The Controller of examination issued examination schedule for BAMS - Ist year course for the Academic Session 2017-18 which is scheduled to start from 4.7.2019.

¶17

As no approval was granted to these 55 students (presently 36 students), 5 such students preferred a writ petition being Misc. Single No.17493 of 2019 (Raghvendra Singh Yadav and ors. vs. Union of India and others) before the Lucknow Bench of this Court. In the said writ petition, following order was passed on 5.7.2019 :-

¶18

"1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned counsel for Union of India, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Anurag Verma, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 and 5.

¶19

2. Sri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing on instructions submits that representation of the petitioner is not received in the office of opposite party no.3 Director, Ayurveda (Syllabur & Evaluation), Department of Ayush, Government of U.P., Lucknow.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the said representation is also annexed as annexure no.2 to the writ petition.

¶21

4. In view thereof, opposite party no.3 Director, Ayurveda (Syllabur & Evaluation), Department of Ayush, Government of U.P., Lucknow is directed to decide the representation of petitioner annexed as annexure-2 to the writ petition by tomorrow and also communicate the same to the petitioner through his counsel.

¶22

5. Put up this case on 09.07.2019 in additional cause list. "

¶23

In pursuance of abovementioned order, the Director Ayurveda (Syllabus and Evaluation) Department of Ayush, U.P., Lucknow passed an order dated 5.7.2019 whereby the approval to writ petitioners therein (5 in number) has been refused on the ground

¶24

that the names of the petitioners did not mention in the merit list of U.P. Combine Merit List (2017).

¶25

It seems that the said five students have not challenged the order dated 5.7.2019, however, the petitioner - institution now has challenged the order dated 5.7.2019 by way of filing present writ petition before this Court.

¶26

Shri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though students have not been selected from the select list of CPAT, however, there is no compromise on the merit and presently these students have studied for one year and are eligible to participate in the BAMS - Ist year examination. Their career will be jeopardised if they are not permitted to participate in the said examination. Learned counsel further submitted that the authorities have kept the issue pending for almost one year and have only came to in action when some students have approached before the Lucknow Bench of this Court, and therefore, the authorities have not acted bona fidely.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that it is admitted fact that the petitioner - Institution has admitted 55 students (presently 36) in the Institution without due process and merit has been compromised. These students have been illegally given admission and the entire fault occurs from the side of petitioner - Institution. It is further submitted that students are at liberty to seek compensation from the petitioner - Institution.

¶28

Considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the record.

¶29

It is admitted that the petitioner - Institution has illegally gave admission to 55 students (presently 36) who had not even participated in the CPAT test, and therefore, benefit of equity cannot be granted to such students as well as to the petitioner - Institution. It is well settled that the very purpose of the CPAT is to maintain merit for such examination and in case, the admissions are granted beyond the merit list, there is no doubt that merit would compromised. There is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶30

In the facts and circumstances of the case, reference of the case of some Institution of State of Kerala is relevant to mention. Some medical Institution had given admissions to the students against the rule and regulations in the State of Kerala, however, the admissions were cancelled and such order was also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court also. The State of Kerala promulgated ordinance in order to protect those students.

¶31

However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court declared the said ordinance to be ultra vires by the judgment passed in the matter of Medical Council of India vs. State of Kerala reported in (2018) SCC Online SC 1467 in which the Supreme Court held that fairness of process of admission and merit cannot be compromised.

¶32

The Supreme Court has also directed to refund the fee received from the students and also held the students to be entitled for compensation also in the matter of Riya George vs. Kannaur Medical College reported in 2019 SCC Online SC 252 .

¶33

The petitioner - Institution has not only compromised with the merit but also put the future of students at stake. Petitioner's college is not entitled for any sympathy or equity.

¶34

In view of the above discussions, the writ petition sans merit.

¶35

However, the students who have been granted illegal admissions in the BAMS course by the petitioner - Institution are at liberty to approach before the appropriate forum to seek compensation from the petitioner - Institution, if so adviced.

¶36

The writ petition is, disposed of , accordingly.

¶37

Order Date :- 22.7.2019 Rishabh

Shaheed Narendra Kumar Ayurvedic Medical College and R.K.M.S. Charitable Hospital v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaheed Narendra Kumar Ayurvedic Medical College and R.K.M.S. Charitable Hospital v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Girija Shankar and 11 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Nitin Kumar and Another Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Natthu Lal Yadav Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Krishna Lal Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Jaspal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others