Aastha Morye Vs State of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education, Lko. and Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7625

Court No. - 19

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 962 of 2025 Petitioner :- Aastha Morye Respondent :- State Of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Medical Education, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Bajpai,Paavan Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Jaiswal Ojus Law,Syed Mohammad Haider Rizv

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1, 2 & 3, Mr. Syed Mohammad Haider Rizvi, learned counsel for opposite parties no.4 & 5 and Mr. Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for opposite party no.6.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit to the short counter affidavit of opposite parties no.4 & 5 filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Petition has been filed challenging order dated 21.01.2025 passed by the Director General, Directorate of Medical Education and Training, Uttar Pradesh as well as order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the Medical College concerned whereby petitioner's admission in the course of M.D. Radio Diagnosis has been cancelled. Also under challenge is the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the District Minority Welfare, Officer, Saharanpur whereby certificate issued earlier indicating petitioner belonging to the minority religion of Buddhism has been cancelled and forms the basis of the other two impugned orders.

¶8

As per submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner, petitioner's parents converted to Buddhism in the year 1994 with a certificate also being issued by a private organization to substantiate the same. It is also submitted that petitioner was born in the year 1997 and was a Buddhist by birth as indicative in her educational certificates and was the basis for her application for the aforesaid post.

¶9

It appears that subsequently a notice dated 21.11.2024 was issued to petitioner to show cause

¶10

why the certificate issued earlier pertaining to her minority religion should not be cancelled in terms of Sections 8 & 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. Reply to same was submitted by petitioner on 04.12.2024 specifically indicating that since petitioner is a Buddhist by birth, provisions of the Act of 2021 would be inapplicable upon her.

¶11

It has been submitted that despite specific assertion being made in the reply, the same has not been considered and by means of the impugned order dated 17.12.2024, a copy which has been brought on record by means of rejoinder affidavit filed today, the minority certificate issued earlier to petitioner has been cancelled without considering plea raised by petitioner in her reply.

¶12

Learned State Counsel on the basis of instruction refutes submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with the submission that the educational certificates relied upon by petitioner in the present writ petition were never produced before the authority concerned and therefore there was nothing to substantiate the plea which has been raised by petitioner in the reply. It is further submitted that even otherwise reply submitted by petitioner has been considered as evident from the order dated 17.12.2024.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for remaining opposite parties submit that they were bound to cancel admission granted to petitioner in view of order dated 17.12.2024 whereby her minority certificate stood cancelled.

¶14

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that the impugned orders dated 21.01.2025 and 23.01.2025 are consequential to the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the District Minority Welfare, Officer cancelling minority status of petitioner.

¶15

A perusal of the notice dated 20.11.2024 clearly indicates the fact that the petitioner was required to show cause why the minority certificate issued earlier be not cancelled since the

¶16

certificate was against provisions of Sections 8 & 9 of the Act of 2021.

¶17

It is also evident from reply submitted by petitioner dated 04.12.2024 that it has been specifically stated that her parents converted to Buddhism in the year 1994 and therefore petitioner was a Buddhist by birth since 02.05.1997 due to which the Act of 2021 was inapplicable.

¶18

A perusal of the impugned order dated 17.12.2024 also is indicative of the fact that the aforesaid specific assertions made by petitioner in the reply dated 04.12.2024 have not been considered at all and have been rejected only on the ground that the reply was found unsatisfactory.

¶19

In the considered opinion of this Court, a notice once issued is not an empty formality and once the petitioner had submitted her reply dated 04.12.2024, it was incumbent upon authority concerned to have adverted to the reasons and response submitted by petitioner, the same could not have been rejected in such a cursory manner without application of mind merely stating that the reply was found unsatisfactory particularly since the reply pertained to applicability of the Act of 2021.

¶20

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is quite evident that the impugned order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the District Minority Welfare, Officer, Saharanpur has been passed in a cursory manner without any application of mind and without adverting to the specific plea raised by petitioner in her reply dated 04.12.2024.

¶21

In view thereof, the impugned order dated 17.12.2024 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari. The consequential order dated 21.01.2025 passed by Director General, Directorate of Medical Education and Training Uttar Pradesh as well as order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the Principal, Lala Lajpat Rai Memorial Medical College also stands quashed by issuance of a writ in nature of certiorari granting liberty to opposite party no.3 i.e. District Minority

¶22

Welfare, Officer, Saharanpur to pass orders afresh but only after considering reply submitted by petitioner dated 04.12.2024 to the show cause notice. Petitioner is also granted liberty to substantiate her pleadings as raised in the reply by submitting relevant certificates which shall be furnished before opposite party no.3 who shall pass fresh orders thereupon after considering the reply submitted by petitioner and the certificates which may be submitted by her.

¶23

Considering aforesaid facts, opposite parties are directed to permit petitioner to pursue the M.D. Radio diagnosis course, which shall be subject to final orders passed by District Minority Welfare, Officer.

¶24

Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself . Parties to bear their own cost.

¶25

Order Date : - 6.2.2025 Subodh/-

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aastha Morye v. State of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aastha Morye v. State of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vinda Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Rupesh Gupta @ Rupesh Kumar Gupta Vs Sher Singh

Rajeev Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Food and Civil Supply Lko and 3 Others

Adima Mishra Thru. Her Father Dr. Anand Kumar Mishra vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Edu. New Delhi and 3 Others

Smt. Alka Singh vs Ajit Singh

Girija and Others Vs Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya and Others