An LL.B. aspirant scoring 151 marks sought mandamus for disclosure of vacancies and admission against vacant OBC seats in CUET-PG 2025 after the 4th Spot Round. Relying on Sumit Kumar Singh, the court held admissions had closed on 30.09.2025 and no fresh round or midstream admission could be ordered.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~2
NEHA MALAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Deepak Janghu, Mr. Ankit Mittal and Mr. Sachin, Advs.
versus
DEAN (ADMISSIONS BRANCH), UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal and Ms. Aishwarya Malhotra, Advs. for University of Delhi.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN O R D E R % 17.10.2025
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2025 at 12:20:12
“NOTIFICATION
The last date of admissions to various Undergraduate (UG)
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2025 at 12:20:12
Programs, Postgraduate (PG) Programs, B.Tech. Programs and Five-Year Integrated Law Programs for the Academic Session 202526 is 30th September, 2025 except Integrated Teacher Education Programme (ITEP).
The withdrawal options for all the above-mentioned programs will be available from 30th September, 2025 to 10th October 2025; and the refund of fees in lieu of the withdrawal, the last date will be 10th October, 2025.”
“16. There is merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent no.1/DU. If this Court were to agree with the submissions of the appellants, there would be no closure to the admission process/filling up of seats or counseling which would be an incongruous and unpalatable situation. Everytime a seat would fall vacant on account of some student leaving the course mid way, some aspirant would petition the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus for
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2025 at 12:20:12
filling up the vacant seat. The universities would endlessly continue the admission process, maybe right uptill the end of the said academic session. This interpretation would create an unending loop for the Universities in general which cannot be countenanced. It was in this context that the Supreme Court in Neelu Arora (supra) had laid down as under:
“6. When a detailed scheme has been framed through orders of this Court and the manner in which it has to be worked out is also indicated therein, we do not think that if in a particular year there is any shortfall or a certain number of seats are not filled up, the same should be done by adopting one more round of counselling because there is no scope for the third round of counselling under the Scheme. It would not be advisable to go on altering the Scheme as and when seats are found vacant. What is to be borne in mind is that broad equality will have to be achieved and not that it should result in any mathematical exactitude . Out of about 1600 seats, if 250 seats are not filled up for various reasons, we do not think it should result in the third round of counselling. If that process is to be adopted then there will be again vacancies and further filling up of the seats falling vacant will have to be undertaken. In that process, it will become endless until all the seats under the all-India quota are filled up. That is not the object of the Scheme formulated by this Court. The object was to achieve a broad-based equality as indicated by us at the outset and we do not think that any steps have to be taken for altering the Scheme. Moreover, this Court in Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh has taken the view that there is no scope for admitting students midstream as that would be against the very spirit of statutes governing medical education. Even if seats are unfilled, that cannot be a ground for making mid-session admissions and there cannot be telescoping of unfilled seats of one year with permitted seats of the subsequent year. If these aspects are borne in mind, we do not think any reliefs as sought for by the petitioners can be
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2025 at 12:20:12
granted under these petitions .”
(emphasis supplied)
It is pertinent to note that while rendering the above opinion, the Supreme Court also considered the earlier judgement in the case of Medical Council of India vs. Madhu Singh & Ors ; reported in (2002) 7 SCC 258 , to reiterate that admitting students midstream would be against the very spirit of statutes governing medical education, as it was in that case. It was also held that even if seats are unfilled, that cannot be a ground for making midstream admissions . The same can be applied on all fours to the present case too. Undeniably, the course commenced from September, 2024 and as per learned counsel for the respondent no.1/DU, End Semester examinations were to be held in December, 2024, thus squarely falling within the mischief of the ratio in Medical Council of India (supra). As per records, the underlying writ petition was filed only on 30.09.2024, by which time the session had already commenced. Moreover, it has been asserted by the respondent no.1/DU that there were no seats left unfilled.”
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J
OCTOBER 17, 2025 aj
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2025 at 12:20:12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the University could be directed to conduct a further counselling round to admit an OBC candidate who scored below the spot-round cut-off after admissions closed on 30.09.2025.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sumit Kumar Singh & Anr. v. University of DelhiFollowed¶11
LPA 1062/2024
Neha Malav
Dean (Admissions Branch), University of Delhi
Vikas Mahajan
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
