Bombay High Court
Rahul Surender Sharma vs Dr D. Y. Patil Medical College Pune on 5 March, 2024
Author: A. S. Chandurkar
Bench: A. S. Chandurkar
2024:BHC-AS:11167-DB
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.6698 OF 2024
Rahul Surender Sharma,
Age- 25, Occ:- Medical Student,
Having address at - House No.595,
Sector - 9, Faridabad Sector - 7,
Faridabad, Haryana - 121 006. ..Petitioner
Versus
1. Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Pune,
Hospital and Research Centre,
Sant Tukaram Nagar, Pimpri,
Pune - 411 018.
2. National Medical Commission
Pocket 14, Sector 8,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110 007.
3. Medical Counselling Committee
Nirwan Vihar, New Delhi - 110 092.
4. The State of Maharashtra
(Through the Secretary
Medical Education Department).
Maharashtra State, Mumbai - 400 032.
(copy to be served on Govt. Pleader High
Court of Judicature of Bombay at Mumbai)
5. Directorate General of Health Services
Through the Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan,
New Delhi - 110 011. ..Respondents
__________
Ms. Yugandhara Pawar Jha with Mr. Rohit Pandey, Mr. Swapnil Wagh &
Ms. Vinita Dandekar for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ganesh K. Gole a/w Mr. Viraj Shelatkar for Respondent No.2 (NMC).
Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl. G. P. a/w Mr. S. P. Shetye, AGP for Respondent
No.4 (State).
Mr. Rui Rodrigues for Respondent Nos.3 & 5.
1 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
__________
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 5th MARCH 2024.
Judgment (Per Jitendra Jain, J.) :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned
counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondents.
2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the Petitioner has prayed for following relief :-
"(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent
No.1 to confirm the seat allotted to the Petitioner for MD Radio
diagnostics in Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Pune in the special
stray round be secured by allotting admission letter to the
petitioner".
Brief facts are as under :
3. The Petitioner has completed his MBBS Course and cleared his
National Eligibility-Cum-Entrance Test (NEET) PG Exam for the course
of MD Radio Diagnostics. Based on his score, the Petitioner was allotted
a seat in Respondent No.1-College on 24 th November 2023 on
provisional basis. The allotment letter mentioned certain conditions to
be fulfilled failing which the allotted seat will be cancelled and security
deposit will be forfeited. As per the schedule of special stray vacancy
round, the Petitioner was to make the payment of fees by 30 th November
2023 upto 5:00 p.m. and furnish all the documents. On 30 th November
2 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
2023, it is the contention of the Petitioner that the wire transfer of
10,000/- (US Dollars) could not be effected on account of technical
glitch. However, by RTGS he made a payment of Rs.9 lakh on 30 th
November 2023. On the same day, the Petitioner by email requested
Respondent No.1-College to consider his application for concession due
to his financial constraints to make the payment of the fees and
requested Respondent No.1-College to give concession. The Petitioner
also requested for extension of the reporting time to resolve the matter.
However the Respondent No.1 did not entertain the said request and it
is on this backdrop that the Petitioner is before us.
4. The Petitioner submits this this is not a case where the seat is
sought to be filled up after the scheduled time prescribed by the
Respondents. The Petitioner was allotted provisional allotment letter on
24th November 2023 as per the schedule. However, since the Petitioner's
father was suffering from cancer there was a delay on his part to make
the payment and furnish all the necessary documents by 30 th November
2023. The Petitioner submits that if the prayers sought for are not
granted then the seat will be left vacant as there is no other candidate to
fill up the seat. The Petitioner further submitted that they are willing to
make the full payment and submit all the documents to regularize the
admission. The Petitioner further submitted that if the prayers sought
3 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
for are not granted then the Petitioner would be losing two crucial years
of his career. The Petitioner, therefore, prayed that considering all the
circumstances the Petition be allowed.
5. The Respondent No.1-College submitted that as per the
schedule, the Petitioner was to make the payment of the fees and submit
all the documents by 30th November 2023 by 5:00 p.m. However, the
Petitioner could not make the payment of the fees and also could not
furnish all the documents. The Petitioner made the payment of Rs.9 lakh
at 18:48 hours. The Respondent No.1-College submitted that these facts
were communicated to the Respondent No.2-NMC. The Respondent
No.1-College further submitted that the Supreme Court in the case of
Medical Council of India vs. Madhu Singh & Ors 1. and other decisions
have held that in medical admission, schedule has to be strictly adhered
to and even if the seats goes vacant no admission can be granted after
the cut-off date.
6. The Respondent No.2-NMC submitted that the admission was
on provisional basis and as per Rules 9 to 11 of "Post Graduate Medical
Education Regulations, 2000 no admission can be given after the cut-off
date. The Respondent No.2 relied upon the decision in the case of
Medical Council of India vs. Madhu Singh & Ors (supra) , Ashish Ranjan
1 (2002) 7 SCC 258
4 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
& Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors 2. and Education Promotion Society for
India & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors . 3and prayed that if there is
violation of the schedule then no extension can be granted.
7. The Respondent Nos.3 and 5 adopted the arguments of
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and submitted that this Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India cannot extend the time schedule for medical
admission.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the
learned counsel for the Respondents and with their assistance have
perused the documents annexed to the Petition.
9. This Petition was originally filed on the original side of this
Court and was numbered as Writ Petition (L) No.2461 of 2024. On 13 th
February 2024, leave was granted by this Court to file the same on the
appellate side. Pursuant thereto the Petitioner has filed present writ
petition on the appellate side.
10. The allotment of seat to the Petitioner on 24 th November 2023
was provisional and not final. The said provisional allotment was subject
to the Petitioner submitting all the documents and making the payment
2 (2016) 11 SCC 225
3 (2019) 7 SCC 38
5 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
of the fees on or before 30 th November 2023. Admittedly, there is no
dispute that by 30th November 2023, the Petitioner could not make the
full payment of the fees, but paid only Rs.9 lakh and that too after the
time provided in the schedule had expired. The Petitioner in his email
requested Respondent No.1-College to consider his prayer for some
concession in the fees since the same was very high for him. Admittedly,
the Petitioner also did not file all the original documents by 30 th
November 2023. Therefore, on both these counts i.e. non-furnishing of
original documents and non-payment of full fees by 30 th November
2023, the Respondents did not confirm the admission of the Petitioner.
We do not see any infirmity in the same.
11. The Supreme Court in the case of Medical Council of India vs.
Madhu Singh & Ors (supra) and in the case of Supreet Batra & Ors. vs.
Union of India & Ors4. have consistently held that the time schedule for
admission to the medical courses has to be strictly adhered to and no
seats can be allotted after the cut-off period even if the seat goes vacant.
In the instant case, by 30th November 2023, the Petitioner failed to make
the payment of the fees nor had he filed all the original documents and
therefore the Respondents were justified in not confirming the allotment
of the seat to the Petitioner. We cannot in exercise of Article 226 of the
4 (2003) 3 SCC 370
6 of 7
Sayyed 902-WP(ST)-6698-2024.doc
Constitution of India extend the time schedule fixed by the Respondents
in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court referred hereinabove.
12. In view of above, we are not inclined to interfere in the Writ
Petition. It is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali
7 of 7
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 07/03/2024 16:32:03
