Animesh Hitendrakumar Joshi vs Indian Institute Of Technology
2021 Latest Caselaw 8843 Bom

                                                             18-WPL-13067-21.doc

Sharayu Khot.
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 13067 OF 2021


     Animesh Hitendrakumar Joshi                          ...Petitioner

             Versus

     Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay               ...Respondent

                                     ----------
     Mr. Rohan Majumdar a/w Mr. Jai Vijay Laxmi                                for the
     Petitioner.
     Mr. Arsh Misra i/by M/s M.V. Kini & Co., for the Respondent.
                                     ----------

                                     CORAM :           R.D. DHANUKA &
                                                       R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

                                     DATE         :    7 July 2021

     ORDER :

1. By this Petition fled under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to

quash and set aside the action of Respondent to introduce new

admission process/criteria issued by Respondent on 29th May

2021 for the course of Masters in Public Policy (MPP) due to

which cut off marks were introduced for GATE examination

during the ongoing admission process, therefore the said action

is vitiated.

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

2. Respondent had issued information brochure for

the course of "Master in Public Policy" describing various

criteria for admission in the said course. The Respondent

issued advertisement in the month of March 2021 for

admission in Post Graduate Course in Master Programme in

Public Policy in the year 2021-2022. In the month of April

2021 the Petitioner submitted his application form for the said

course. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner

cleared the Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE)

examination and fulflled all the criteria as prescribed in

brochure/advertisement and only after thorough scrutiny, the

Petitioner was declared eligible for essay test. However, in the

essay test which was scheduled between 31st May 2021 to 2nd

June 2021 only 131 students were declared as eligible. The

Petitioner's name was not found in the said eligibility list.

3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent invited our

attention to various information set out in the said information

brochure and would submit that in the eligibility criteria under

clause 5, it was prescribed that total number of seats would be

30 including TAships, Self Finance Candidates, Fellowship

Award Candidates and In-Service Candidates. The candidates

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

applying for Institute's TAship will be required to submit valid

GATE scores to be considered for the same. It is further

provided that the candidates without any work experience will

need to submit a valid GATE score. Learned Counsel for the

Petitioner submits that the Petitioner had scored 364 marks.

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that on

29th May 2021 after accepting application of the Petitioner on

19th May 2021 issued additional conditions by prescribing the

initial GATE course cut off of 500, with corresponding cut offs

for OBC-NC and SC/ST. He submits that these additional

conditions could not have been prescribed after accepting

application of the Petitioner and contrary to the conditions

which were not prescribed in the information brochure and the

notice issued by the Respondent.

5. Learned Counsel for the Respondent on the other

hand invited our attention to the documents at page 38 fled by

the Petitioner and would submit that All India Rank of the

Petitioner was 14475 as against 30 seats required to be flled in

by the Respondent. He relied upon the clause in the said

document at page 31 stating that "Qualifying in GATE 2021

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

does not guarantee either an admission to a Post Graduate

Program or a as a scholarship/assistantship. Admitting

institutes may conduct further tests and interviews for fnal

selection."

6. Learned Counsel also relied upon the information

brochure 2021 and more particularly clause 2.2 and would

submit that it was clearly provided that to avail the fnancial

assistance (scholarship/assistantship), the candidate must

frst secure the admission to a program in one of the central

government supported institutes, by a procedure that could

vary from institute to institute. Depending upon the norms

adopted by a specifc institute or department of the institute,

the candidates may be admitted directly into a course based on

their performance in GATE only or based on their performance

in GATE and an admission test or interview conducted by the

department to which they have applied and/or the candidate's

academic record. He submits that the said clause further

provides that the admitting institutes could prescribe a

minimum passing marks in the test or interview.

7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent invited our

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

attention to page 41 of the Writ Petition which according to the

Petitioner prescribed additional conditions after accepting the

application fled by the Petitioner. It is submitted by the learned

Counsel for the Respondent that the said conditions were not

additional condition but prescribed additional eligibility which

the Respondent was entitled to prescribe as per the said

brochure 2021 and also as prescribed the document at page 38.

8. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that

fnal merit list has been already announced on 25th June 2021

selecting 30 candidates. The Petitioner could not have expected

to have been selected holding all India Ranking at 14475. He

strongly placed reliance on the reasons recorded by this Court

in the order dated 22nd June 2021 while rejecting the interim

relief.

9. Learned Counsel placed reliance on the judgment of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Ambesh Kumar Vs. Principal,

L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut and Others 1 and particularly

paragraphs 22, 24 and 27 in support of his submissions that

the Respondents could prescribe additional eligibility criteria

1 1986 (Supp) SCC 543

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

in view of the Respondent receiving large number of

applications for 30 seats and also in view of terms and

conditions of the information brochure and the other

documents referred to aforesaid.

10. A perusal of document at page 38, 'GATE

2021 Score card' clearly indicates that the rank of Petitioner

was 14475 as against the total number of candidates appeared

in the test at 115270. The said score card clearly prescribed

that qualifying in GATE 2021 does not guarantee either an

admission to a Post Graduate Program or as a

scholarship/assistantship. Admitting institutes may conduct

further tests and interviews for fnal selection.

11. The information brochure 2021 which was

admittedly applicable to the subject matter of the admission

clearly indicates that admitting institutes are allowed to

prescribe a minimum passing marks in the test or interview.

12. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is thus not

right in his contention that since his client has already secured

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

364 marks in Graduate Aptitude Test GATE 2021, he became

eligible to get admission in the course in question only on that

ground.

13. In our view, the Respondent was entitled to

prescribe additional eligibility criteria as set out at page 41 on

29th May 2021, in view of liberty already reserved in the

information brochure and also in view of the condition that

qualifying with the qualifed in GATE 2021 does not guarantee

either an admission to a Post Graduate Program or as a

scholarship/assistantship.

14. The Petitioner admittedly did not secure the

GATE secured cut off of 500 and did not comply with those

additional eligibility criteria described on 29th May 2021.

15. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dr.

Ambesh Kumar Vs. Principal, L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut

(supra) has held that the impugned order which was subject

matter of the said Special Leave Petition laying down the

qualifcation for a candidate to be eligible for being considered

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

for selection for admission to the said course on the basis of the

merit as specifed by regulations cannot be said to be in confict

with the said regulation or in any way repugnant to the said

regulations. It does not in any way encroach upon the

standards prescribed by the said regulations. On the other

hand by laying down a further qualifcation of eligibility, it

promotes and furthers the standard of an institution. The

Government who runs these colleges has a right to prescribe

the test of eligibility as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in various cases referred to in the said judgment. The

principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Dr. Ambesh Kumar Vs. Principal, L.L.R.M. Medical College,

Meerut (supra) applies to the facts of this case.

16. This Court while rejecting the interim relief

prayed by the Petitioner after hearing the learned Counsel for

the Petitioner recorded reasons. It is held by this Court that if

there are the limited number of seats, it is permissible for an

institution, in a given case, where the applications exceeds the

seats available, to provide for cut off marks and short list the

candidates. This Court accordingly, refused to grant any stay or

to defer the admission process. The Petitioner has not

18-WPL-13067-21.doc

impugned the said order dated 22nd June 2021 rejecting the

interim relief. Pursuant to the said order dated 22nd June

2021, the Respondent has already fnalised the selection list of

30 candidates on 25th June 2021. The name of the Petitioner is

admittedly not included in the said list.

17. For the reasons recorded aforesaid, in our view, the

Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly, dismissed.

18. There shall be no order as to costs.

 [R.I. CHAGLA J.]                                  [R.D. DHANUKA, J.]