Dr Shashank Chandra & Ors vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprashta ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 2129 Del

$~45
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+         LPA 322/2017 & CM No.16305/2017
%                            Date of decision : 1st May, 2017
    DR SHASHANK CHANDRA & ORS        ..... Appellant
                 Through: Mr. Angad Mehta, Adv.

                    versus

    GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASHTA UNIVERSITY &
    ORS                         ..... Respondent
                 Through: Mr. Mukul Talwar, Sr.
                          Adv.with Ms. Anita Sahani and
                          Ms. Leela Suman, Advs. for R-
                          1
                          Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal and
                          Ms. Disha Malhotra, Advs. for
                          R-2/University of Delhi
                          Mr. Shadan Farasat and Mr.
                          Ahmed Said, Advs.for R-3
                          Ms. Abha Malhotra and Mr.
                          Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Advs.
                          for R-4
                          Mr. T. Singhdev, Ms. Biakthan
                          Sangi, Mr. Tarun Verma and
                          Ms. Puja Sarkar, Advs. for R-
                          5/MCI
    CORAM:
    HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
                             JUDGMENT (ORAL)

GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

1. This appeal has been filed assailing an interim order dated 13th April, 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.2610/2017. The petitioner appears to have inter alia challenged Article 2.1.1 of the University of Delhi, Faculty of Medical Sciences Bulletin Information and Article 2.5(6) and Article 2.5.3(1) of the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Admission Brochure for the academic year 2017-18 and/or any other eligibility criteria laid down by the said respondents in their admission brochure/bulletin of information which provides for institutional preference/reservation respectively.

2. Based on this challenge, the appellant sought a combined counselling through the designated authority for admission to all PG/Medical Courses in terms of Regulation 9A of the Medical Council of India Post Graduate Regulations, 2000.

3. The interim order sought by the appellant was rejected by the learned Single Judge while noting the submissions made by both counsels and recording a prima facie view that the impugned brochures do not violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

4. We are informed by Mr. Mukul Talwar, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 herein as well as by Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, learned counsel appearing for the

Delhi University-respondent no.2 herein that the first round of counselling for post-graduate medical seats in the two universities is already over and students have already joined the courses. In this background, no relief can be granted in the present appeal.

In view thereof, the appeal is dismissed with the observation that anything done by the respondent would be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

ANU MALHOTRA, J MAY 01, 2017/kr