37. Secondly, it is equally well settled, in law, that, even if a candidate is ineligible for admission, so long as the candidate has disclosed all particulars while obtaining admission and it is after considering the documents filed by the candidate and examining the candidate’s eligibility for admission on that basis, that admission is granted, the admission cannot be subsequently cancelled by the authorities by revisiting the decision to grant admission. We may refer, in this context, to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajendra Prasad Mathur v. Karnataka University5 , which was followed in A. Sudha v. University of Mysore6 . Both these cases dealt with admissions to the MBBS course, as in the present case. In A. Sudha , the situation was worse than that which obtains in the present case. The candidate, A. Sudha (“Sudha”, hereinafter) was, in fact, ineligible for admission as she had not secured the requisite percentage of marks in her pre-university certificate examination. On this basis, after granting admission to the MBBS course, the admission was cancelled on the ground that Sudha was not eligible for admission. Sudha petitioned the High Court, which held that she was not entitled for admission and, therefore, refused her plea for reversing
