Vasu Agarwal Vs Union of India & Ors.

¶1

$~67

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 268/2026 VASU AGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Avijit Patnaik, Mr. Shreyan Das, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, SPC with with Mr. Amit Kumar Rana, GP with Ms. Tanisha Bhatia, Ms. Kawaljeet Kaur, Advs. for R-1&2

¶6

Mr. Om Prakash, Ms. Swati Mishra, Mr. Chandresh Pratap, Ms. Komal Yadav for R-3/ Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R

¶8

%

¶9

13.01.2026

¶10

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

¶11

“a. A writ of Mandamus and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ and or appropriate order thereby directing the Respondent No. 2 to issue the final admission order in favour of the Petitioner and allot the Petitioner the requisite seat in the Respondent No. 3 college; b. A writ of Mandamus and/or order and/or direction in the

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 17/01/2026 at 13:47:00

¶14

nature of Mandamus or any other writ and or appropriate order thereby allowing the Petitioner to participate in round three of the counselling without forfeiture of the security deposit;...”

¶15

The respondent No. 1 is the Union of India through Secretary of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare., the respondent No. 2 is Medical Counselling Committee (“MCC”) and the respondent No. 3 is a private medical college affiliated with Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University. i.e. Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Faridabad.

¶16

The petitioner is challenging the act of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, wherein the respondent No. 2 has refused admission and to allot the seat to the petitioner in respondent No. 3 college under the NRI M.D. (General Medicine) Category, despite the Petitioner having duly participated in counselling process conducted by the Respondent No. 2.

¶17

The petitioner secured All India Rank of 98465 and was issued a provisional allotment letter dated 16.12.2025 by the respondent No. 2. Additionally, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs. USD 87500 i.e. Rs. 79 Lakhs approx. to Respondent No. 3 towards the entire tuition fees for first year along with other fees and also the security deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/was paid to the Respondent No. 2.

¶18

The Respondent No. 3 admittedly received the entire fees from the petitioner and despite that, has not allotted the seat to the petitioner citing closure of the portal of respondent No. 2. which prevented respondent No. 3 from downloading the admission order for the petitioner for the said alloted seat.

¶19

Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the copy of the swift payment dated 23.12.2025 made through the

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 17/01/2026 at 13:47:00

¶22

Petitioner’s NRI Sponsor’s bank account maintained in Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. Further, it was only on account of Christmas holidays in Canada that there was delay in remittance of the amount to respondent No. 3.

¶23

Additionally, the paid amount was reflected on 30.12.2025, i.e the date when the portal of Respondent No. 2 closed.

¶24

No reply has been filed by any of the respondents and the seat is still available.

¶25

I am of the view that the right to pursue higher or professional education even though not explicitly spelt out as a fundamental right in part III of the Constitution of India, is an affirmative obligation on the part of the state to ensure this right and the same cannot be permitted to be curtailed, lightly.

¶26

The petitioner has done all that was required of the petitioner well within time and cannot be held responsible for the intervening holidays on account of Christmas. Additionally, the amount was duly credited to respondent No. 3’s account on the day of the closure of the portal.

¶27

For the said reasons, the writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent No. 2 to issue the final admission order in favour of the petitioner and allot the seat provisionally allotted to the petitioner in the respondent No. 3 college within one week from today.

¶28

Additionally, all rights available to MD students in the scheme of counselling shall be available to the petitioner.

¶29

The petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶30

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶31

JANUARY 13, 2026/sp

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 17/01/2026 at 13:47:00

Vasu Agarwal v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasu Agarwal v. Union of India & Ors.

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

Similar cases

Anil Bahadur Vs Union of India and Anr.

Atul Punj Vs Union of India & Ors.

Cloud 9 Pojects Private Limited Vs Anubhav Gupta and Ors.

Mohit Singh Vs Indira Gandhi National Open University and Anr.

Ms Gupta Sales and Service Vs Principal Commissioner Cgst & Anr.

Srishti Kalra Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (Ggsipu) & Ors.

Azeem Vs Jamia Millia Islamia through Its Hony Director Games and Sports Department Jmi New Delhi 110025 & O

Kajal and Anrs. Vs the Controller (Cd) DM S/W District and Anr.

Mohit Singh Vs Indira Gandhi National Open University and Anr.

Niraj Surlia and Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Aditya Birla Finance Limited Vs Gsk Industries and Ors.

Yadhuvir Singh Manhas Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank and Ors.

Rajit Kumar Vs Delhi Developement Authority and Anr.

Gautam Thapar Vs Reserve Bank of India and Anr.