Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

T.Anjani vs State Of A.P, on 1 April, 2022

Bench: A V Sai, Ravi Cheemalapati

         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
                          AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

                 WRIT PETITION No.3811 OF 2022

ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice A.V.Sesha Sai)

      Heard Sri B.Ramashankara Rao, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri N.Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General for

Union of India, for respondent No.3, learned Government Pleader

for Medical and Health for respondent No.1 and Sri G.Vijay

Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, apart

from perusing the material available on record.

2. This Writ Petition is filed for the following reliefs:

"To pass an order or orders or a writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents No.1 in assigning lesser priority for medal winners than participants in priority II in G.O.Ms.No.109, dated 18.08.2016, for the purpose of admission into MBBS/BDS courses for the academic year 2021-22, under 1% quota reserved for NCC cadets even after the orders of this Hon'ble Court Dated: 18.04.2019 in I.A.No.3 of 2018 in WP No.23930 of 2018 and WP No.28822 of 2018 as arbitrary, unjust and untenable:

(A) the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not considering the Bronze Medal won by the petitioner in the National Adventure Sailing Championship conducted by the 4th respondent for assigning appropriate priority in terms of G.O.Ms.109

dt.18.08.2016 as arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable under law and (B) consequently, direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for admission into MBBS/BDS courses for the academic year 2021-22 by duly fixing more priority for medal winners than the participants under Priority-II in G.O.Ms.No.109, dated 18.08.2016, under 1% quota reserved for NCC cadets in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. The petitioner herein appeared for NEET-2021 for

admissions into MBBS/BDS courses and she secured All India

Rank of 4,60,973. Pursuant to a notification issued by

respondent No.2-Dr.N.T.R.University of Health Sciences, the

petitioner herein submitted her application, claiming a seat

under NCC Quota. Seats to an extent of 1% are reserved for

NCC candidates as per the Rules. According to the petitioner,

she joined in NCC and secured A-Certificate and she also

participated in National Adventure Sailing Championship

Competitions conducted by the Sailing Federation of

India/respondent No.4 herein during the period from 04.10.2017

to 08.10.2017 and got third place (Bronze Medal) in the said

competitions. As per the procedure in vogue, the duty of

verification and clearing the names of the candidates, claiming

seats under NCC Quota rests with respondent No.3-National

Cadet Corps (NCC), Secunderabad. Vide G.O.Ms.No.109, Health,

Medical and Family Welfare (C1) Department, dated 18.08.2016,

the State Government approved priorities to be adopted for

admission into MBBS and BDS Courses for 1% seats reserved for

NCC candidates. According to the petitioner, she is entitled for

priority under Clause (e) of Priority-II, as mentioned in the said

governmental order.

4. While inter alia pleading that respondent No.3-NCC

authorities refused to recognize her participation in National

Federation Sailing Championship on the ground that she did not

represent in the said event through NCC as per Note-5 of

G.O.Ms.No.109 dated 18.08.2016, the present Writ Petition came

to be instituted.

5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the said refusal on the part of the NCC runs counter to the

judgment of the common High Court in W.P.Nos.28822 of 2018

and the order of the Telangana High Court dated 18.04.2019 in

I.A.No.3 of 2018 in W.P.No.23930 of 2018 and I.A.No.6 of 2018

in W.P.No.23973 of 2018 and the report of the Investigating

Officer dated 16.09.2018 submitted on the directions of the

common High Court in W.P.No.28822 of 2018 and Batch.

6. Learned Assistant Solicitor General, Sri N.Harinath,

appearing for respondent No.3, contends that in view of Notes-4

and 5 of G.O.Ms.No.109 dated 18.08.2016, the certificate

produced by the petitioner and said to have been given by

respondent No.4 cannot be considered. It is further submitted

that respondent No.4 is a self-styled organization and is not

affiliated to Yachting Association of India. It is further submitted

by the learned counsel that though respondent No.3 sought

certain clarifications from respondent No.4, respondent No.4 did

not furnish the relevant information.

7. It is significant to note in this context that when

similar issue fell for consideration before the common High Court

in W.P.No.28822 of 2018 and Batch, the common High Court

allowed the said Writ Petitions and paragraph Nos.42, 43, 45

and 49 of the said judgment read as follows:

"42. After having indicated the position with regard to the individual/team events/sports, the Investigating Officer has also recorded certain findings with regard to the grievances of each of the writ petitioners. The recommendations made by him could be summarized in the form of a tabular column as follows:

S.No. Petitioner/s in Recommendation of Investigating Officer

1. W.P.No.29038/2018 Her Local Republic Day Parade Camp Certificate should be recognized and she could be given Priority III(a).

2.       W.P.No.29659/2018                          - do -
3.       W.P.No.28822/2018         She is not entitled to the priority for
                                   participating in National Adventure





                                   Sailing Championship, organised by
                                   the Sailing Federation of India, as she
                                   was not sponsored by NCC.
4.    W.P.No.29635/2018            The candidates participated in NCC
                                   National Games in the year 2016 and
                                   hence      they  cannot     be    made
                                   to suffer now. They are entitled to
                                   Priority II(f).
5.    W.P.No.29678/2018                             -do-
6.    W.P.No.30251/2018                             -do-

43. In the light of the opinion expressed by the Investigating Officer, whose conclusion alone is extracted in a nutshell in the tabular column above, all the petitioners except perhaps the petitioner in W.P.No.28822 of 2018 (who participated in the sailing championship), are entitled to relief. But the petitioner in W.P.No. 28822 of 2018 is also wronged since the stand taken by the NCC directorate about sports/events organized by NCC Directorate is found to be misleading. Thus it is clear that the petitioners in these writ petitions have been accorded wrong priorities, which has resulted in the candidates either not getting a seat or getting a seat under the payment category or getting a seat in BDS Course. Therefore, the petitioners are actually entitled to the reliefs that they have sought for.

45. In Chandigarh Administration v. Jasmine Kaur and S. Nihaal Ahamed v. Dean, Velammal Medical College Hospital and Research, the Supreme Court merely awarded compensation on the ground that admission beyond the cut- off date was not possible. But this proposition was doubted by another Bench of the Supreme Court in S. Krishna Sradha v. State of Andhra Pradesh . The Court has now referred the issue to a Larger Bench. Till the Larger Bench comes to a conclusion that compensation need not be the only relief that could be granted, we think it is not possible to violate the mandate of the Supreme Court, by directing the grant of admission beyond the cut-off date.

49. In fine, we find that the petitioners have been wrongfully denied of appropriate priorities and they are entitled to relief. The only relief that could be granted to them is to direct the erring party to compensate the petitioners monetarily. In this case, the NCC Directorate has played havoc, both in the matter of preparation of priorities and in the matter of allowing candidates to participate in Local Republic Day Parade Camp or Inter- State or National events/sports. Hence, the writ petitions are allowed directing the NCC Directorate to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) to each of the writ petitioners. It is open to the NCC Directorate to initiate an in-house procedure for finding out the person who was responsible within the local NCC Directorate, for the mess created by them and to initiate action against such persons. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. No costs."

8. It is also pertinent to note that when the validity of

similar Note-5 fell for consideration before the Telangana High

Court in I.A.No.2 of 2018 in W.P.No.23930 of 2018 and I.A.No.6

of 2018 in W.P.No.23973 of 2018, a Division Bench of the

Telangana High Court had set aside the said Note-5 and

paragraph Nos.11 to 14 of the said judgment read as follows:

"11. The sum and substance of the order/passed on 09.11 2018 in W.P. No.29038 of 2018 batch is as follows:

i) The report of the NCC Directorate was nothing but a cover up of the illegalities committed by the local NCC Directorate;

ii) However, this Court could not upset the admissions already made, as it would have resulted in a chaotic situation;

iii) The Investigating Officer conceded in his report that games in the NCC at the National Level were discontinued from 09.05.2017. Even Team Games played between different State Teams of NCC were discontinued from 09.05.2017.

12. Therefore, Note No.5 of Government Orders assailed the petitions, out which present review applications arise, was obviously absurd, as games were organized by itself. unfortunately, the NCC Directorate played mischief including Note resulting candidates who are eligible, getting higher priorities candidates who eligible, getting lower priorities. Therefore, the under review requires to recalled.

13. even if order under review retalled, the petitions cannot allowed, as related adimissions for academic year 2018-19. We already denied relief to lot petitioners, were parties to batch in No.29038 of 2018. In fact, applicant in I.A. No.3 of 2018 in No.23930 of 2018 was petitioner in No.28822 of which form.ed part of the batch cases disposed of 09.11.2018.

14. Therefore, review applications allowed to limited extent, setting aside Note No.5 in orders challenged in the petitions. However, petitioner I.A.No.3 of 2018, who was petitioner in No.23930 of cannot granted any relief.

9. It is also significant to note that the common High

Court in W.P.No.29038 of 2018 and Batch, appointed an

Investigation Officer, Sri Brigadier Roveen with the following

terms of reference:

"a) The Officer nominated to investigate, shall take note of the discrepancies pointed out by the petitioners.

b) Examine the records of the local office independently, without placing too much reliance upon the ministerial staff employed therein.

c) His investigation shall include issues such as:

(i) The details of games, both individual and team events, sponsored by NCC Directorate and / or recognized by NCC Directorate.

(ii) The credentials of the candidates who are already selected for admission under the quota reserved for NCC.

(iii) The genuineness of the training undergone by the selected candidates and the genuineness of the certificates produced by them.

(d) The Officer entrusted with the investigation should keep in mind the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioners wanted a C.B.I. investigation, but this Court has reposed faith in an officer nominated by the Headquarters.

(e) If the investigation does not inspire the confidence of this Court, the Court may have to explore other alternatives.

(f) The investigation shall be completed and a report filed on or before 10-09-2018 (Later extended to 14-09- 2018).

(g) Both the Universities involved in these cases shall inform the candidates who have already gained admission under the quota for NCC, that their admissions will be treated as provisional and that their continuance will depend upon the outcome of the investigation relating to the genuineness of their claims for appropriate priorities."

10. A copy of the said report is placed on record. In

respect of W.P.No.28822 of 2018, at paragraph Nos.37 and 38,

the said Investigating Officer reported in the following manner:

"37. The petitioner Ms. Vidya Rani participated in National Adventure Sailing Championship and produced a certificate obtained from the Sailing Federation of India and an NCC B certificate.

38. It is well understood that the Sailing federation of India is the only recognized National Body for Sailing the country. But NCC does not sponsor any cadet for sports / adventure activities where risk is involved In this case, she had not participated through NCC, and therefore the certificate of cadet Vidya Rani cannot be accepted and she may not be given credit for her participation."

11. It is also pertinent to note in this context that when

similar Note-4 of the governmental order fell for consideration, a

Division Bench of the Telangana High Court passed an interim

order on 30.07.2019 and the said order reads as follows:

"Perusal of the record reflects that the petitioner possesses Certificate-B issued by the National Cadet Corps and won the Bronze medal in the sailing competition at National Level-2017 held by the Sailing Federation of India at Hussain Sagar, Hyderabad. In terms of the priorities stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.75, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (CI) Department, dated 08.09.2015, medal winners in sailing events conducted by the respective federation at national level are categorized under Priority-II (e). However, the

petitioner has not been given due credit for the medal won by her in the sailing event.

Learned Assistant Solicitor General for India appearing for the third respondent would contend that as the aforestated sailing event was held by the Sailing Federation of India and the National Cadet Corps had nothing to do with it, the medal won by the petitioner cannot be taken into account. He would rely upon Note-4 appended to G.O.Ms.No.75, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (CI) Department, dated 08.09.2015, in support of his contention that only NCC certificates issued by NCC authorities would be valid.

However, this argument loses sight of the fact that Priority-II (e) only speaks of medal winners and not issuance of certificates. Significantly Priority-III (c) speaks of C, B & A certificate holders and admittedly, these certificates are issued only by the NCC authorities. Be it noted that Note-4 speaks of NCC certificates and not the participation certificates issued by the Federations/Associations covered by Priority-II (e) and II

(f).

We therefore find no merit in the stand of the NCC authorities that the petitioner: cannot be given due credit for the medal won by her at a national level sailing event conducted by the Sailing Federation of India.

There shall accordingly be a direction to respondents 2 & 3 to consider the candidature of the petitioner for admission into MBBS/BDS Course for the academic year 2019-20 by assigning her Priority-II (e)(iii) upon due verification of her winning the said medal as claimed by her.""

12. This Court, on 15.02.2022, passed an interim order in

the present Writ Petition, directing that the petitioner's

candidature for admission into MBBS/BDS course for the

academic year 2021-2022 shall be considered in accordance with

the Priority II (e) category of G.O.Ms.No.109, dated 18.08.2016,

after verifying from respondent No.4. According to respondent

No.3, in terms of the said order, dated 04.03.2022, respondent

No.3 sought information from respondent No.4. The reply

received from respondent No.4 dated 14.03.2022, which is filed

along with the counter affidavit, reads as follows:

"Sir/Madam This is to certify that T.Anjani won third place in adventure sailing competitions 2017 held at Hyderabad is found genuine.

a) This federation formed and established in 1968. The Government of India and various state Governments in the year 2006 onwards banned using names "India/State" as registered names for any of the Association/Federations. In this connection this federation after obtaining permission from the government to use the name and style as sailing federation of India in the year 2007.