A single judge bench of Justice Sameer Jain of the Rajasthan High Court observed that the merit of a candidate is a cardinal factor in determining eligibility for admission. The Court held that the inability of an applicant to submit documents due to reasons beyond their control must be examined by the authorities and the factors and circumstances leading to non-submission must be taken into account, however, the merit remains paramount. in terms of determining eligibility.

Background

The petitioners possessing the required eligibility conditions appeared for the NEET-UG 2024 examination conducted by the respondents. After general counseling, the respondents informed the candidates on 23.10.2024 that there was a process of filling vacancies for MBBS and BDS courses. The petitioners were summoned for the document verification stage which took place on 28.10.2024.

The petitioners have submitted their Class X and XII marksheets, domicile certificate, transfer certificate and caste certificate etc. during the wandering vacancy cycle. They were asked to submit an affidavit as the subject ‘Biology’ was not mentioned in their Class XI mark sheets. The petitioners attributed it to promotions from Class XI to Class XII amid the COVID-19 pandemic. They also said that the central and state governments had ordered that this measure be applied to all students in this academic year.

The petitioner submitted an affidavit on 28.10.2024 (Annexure-10) along with the deposit for MBBS/BDS award.

As per the revised provisional combined merit list, the name of the applicant appeared in the serial number. 3647 and later in the provisional combined allotment list for College allotments, his name was excluded from the list. The petitioner sent a letter to the respondents on 30.10.2024 and 31.10.2024, but no response was received.

Aggrieved, the petitioner along with others sharing similar grievances approached the Court.

Disputes of the parties:

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even though the petitioner was a meritorious candidate, it was better for respondents 5 and 6 to exclude the petitioner from the list. Terming it a violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, the council referred to the order in Yashpreet Dhruv Vs. the president of the National Medical Council and the Ors.

It was submitted that the petitioners were not given any opportunity to submit the certificate in the expected/prescribed format.

Rely on Asha counters. Pt. BD Sharma University of Health Sciences and Orscounsel argued that since the petitioner was meritorious, this should have been an exclusive criterion for allotment of seats.

On the other hand, the respondent’s counsel stated that the petitioners were informed in time that it is mandatory to furnish Class XI mark sheet along with relevant subjects for clearing the vacancy test.

Relying on a supplementary affidavit provided by the Chairman of the Board of Counsel, according to which only 878 candidates out of a total of 920 passed the stage of document verification, the Board said that the petitioners had no right conferred on them for the allocation of seats in this case. Wandering holiday tour. Moreover, 19 candidates had not even presented the promotion certificates in which biology was one of their subjects in 11^th Grade.

Counsel relied on the decisions rendered in Ramkrishna Medical College Hospital and Research Center Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., Premsukh Vs. Union of India and Gold., And S. Krishna Sradha Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.

Conclusions of the Court:

First, the Court emphasized that applicants with good merit must have a fair chance of being admitted.

The question before the Court was whether the certificate submitted by the petitioner on 31.10.2024 could be considered valid and whether it would make the petitioner eligible, given that he was given very less time to furnish the same . Moreover, the petitioners were also more deserving than the respondents who were preferred over the petitioners.

The Court held that the Verification of Documents/Stray Vacancy Round was conducted hastily in the middle of the holidays because of Deepawali. It seemed obvious that the candidates would not have been able to obtain the required diplomas from their respective schools during the holidays.

The Court held that the marksheets of Classes X and XII were relevant and mandatory documents and the petitioners had submitted them on time.

The Court held that the petitioners were excluded from the list simply because they were not able to furnish the required mark sheet i.e. Class XI mark sheet with ‘Biology’ as one of the subjects, while defendant no. Colleges 5 and 6 being less meritorious, the petitioners were allotted the colleges of their preference.

The Court observed that it was beyond the control of the petitioners to submit the certificates from rural areas and also due to other issues mentioned. He held that the applicants had approached the Court without delay. Further, it was held that the respondents could not establish justification for the mandatory provision requiring submission of a Class XI mark sheet describing ‘Biology’ as one of the subjects. Even though it was reflected in the marksheet of class XII.

The Panel also declared itself convinced by the argument that the Respondents had not given the Applicants sufficient time to submit the required documents in accordance with the mandatory provisions.

Rely more on Dr. Pradeep Jain Vs. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors, the Court reiterated that in determining the eligibility of candidates, merit alone should be the criterion for admission to MBBS courses and that the rule of merit should not be defeated at any cost.

The Court said that while considering a candidate, merit, impartiality and transparency of the selection process constituted the philosophy of the selection/admission process.

The bench mentioned Dolly Chhanda vs JEE Chairman, reiterating that any violation of the rule relating to the presentation of evidence does not necessarily result in the rejection of the application.

Further relying on Asha Vs. Pt. BD Sharma University of Health Sciences and Ors. and Premsukh v. Union of India & Ors., the Court observed,

“the merit obtained by the petitioners should be the exclusive criterion for allotment of seats/colleges, and in no case, due to technical formalities, should the fundamental rights of the meritorious petitioners be compromised and the petitions in question fall within the scope of application of the rarest of rare cases where judicial intervention is justified.

Making these observations, the Court directed the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners, strictly on the basis of merit and award the medical colleges keeping in view the same. Furthermore, the candidature of Respondents 5 and 6 was rejected, considering their lesser merit compared to the Applicants.

Case Title: Kanchan Kumawat v. Union of India

Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. Vivek Joshi Mr. Tanveer Ahamad Mr. Vikash Ghosalya with Mr. Prithvi Pal Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Sharma

Counsel for the respondent: Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG with Mr. Yash Joshi Mr. Devesh Yadav, CGC Mr. MS Rghav for NTA with Mr. Vishvas Saini Mr. Sanjay Khadar for respondent no.5 Mr. Angad Mirdha for NMC M . Abhinav Srivastava for Mr. Raghunandan Sharma, for respondent no.6

Click here to download the order/judgment