Dolly v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Apr 2026WRIC/3018/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NEET PG counselling; seat locking/blocking; provisional allotment number; counselling fee deposit; security deposit; whether a seat can be locked without deposit of amount; Rajasthan NEET PG Counselling Board; Uttar Pradesh State counselling; vacant seats; candidate denied seat despite no fault; time schedule over; writ petition at notice stage; WRIT - C No. 3018 of 2026; Dolly v. State of U.P.; Jaspreet Singh, J.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; next date 06.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief at this interlocutory stage; notices accepted for respondent nos. 1 to 3, respondents' counsel to assist the Court on five framed points, and matter listed on 06th April, 2026 in the list of fresh cases. ¶¶19

Dolly vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 3018 of 2026

Dolly

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sumedha Sen Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Gyanendra Kumar Srivastava, Syed Mohammad Haider Rizvi

¶9

Court No. - 8

¶10

HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of respondent no. 1 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. Sri S.M.H. Rizvi, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 2. Sri Gyanendra Srivastava, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 3.

¶12

By means of the instant petitioner, the petitioner raises a question that she had successfully applied for counselling with the respondent no.4 and she had also deposited the requisite fee and was allotted a provisional number. Later, when the final result for allotment was published, her name was not mentioned in the list. She thereafter enquired from the Authorities and was informed that she had already locked a seat in counseling in the Neet PG Counselling Board in the State of Rajasthan and therefore she automatically was ineligible for counselling participation in the State of U.P.

¶13

It is the specific case of the petitioner that she did not lock her seat in Rajasthan. Had that been so, then she could not have participated in the counselling of U.P. and moreover, her fee also could not have been accepted.

¶14

The learned counsel for the State, Sri Gyanendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and Sri Rizvi, learned counsel for the

¶15

WRIC No. 3018 of 2026

¶16

¶17

respondent no.2 shall assist the Court on the following points:

¶18

(i) what is the process regarding the counselling, (ii) under what circumstances, the seat will be treated to have been blocked during counselling with specific clarity as to in the absence of any deposit of amount whether a seat can be treated to be locked, (iii) under what circumstances, a security deposit is taken from a candidate and for what purpose, (iv) how many seats are still vacant in the State counselling of Uttar Pradesh. (v) In case of any fault on the part of respondent nos.3 and 4 in which there is no fault of a candidate whether such a candidate can be denied a seat even though the time schedule is over.

¶19

List this matter on 06th April, 2026 in the list of fresh cases to enable the learned counsel for the respondents to assist the Court.

¶20

(Jaspreet Singh,J.)

¶21

April 2, 2026

¶22

Asheesh

¶23

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

Dolly v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dolly v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Edu. Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Vandana Shukla and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Secondary Edu.) Govt. of U.P., Lko. and 2 Others

Prabhat Srivastava vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others

Ram Kripal Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Girja Shankar Constable Pno 112072041 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Vinod Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Forest U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Sultan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ( Irrigation Deptt.) Lko. and 7 Others