Delhi High Court
Aditya Rathore vs Delhi Technological University & ... on 9 February, 2022
Via Video conferencing
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision:- 09.02.2022
+ W.P.(C) 40/2021 & CM APPL.111/2021(interim order)
ADITYA RATHORE ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, Adv
versus
DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Avnish Ahlawat, SC with Mrs.
Tania Ahlawat, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh and Ms.
Palak Rohmetra, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL)
1. The petitioner, who had appeared in the Joint Entrance Examination
(Main), 2020 ('JEE') conducted by the respondents, has approached this
Court seeking the following reliefs:-
"a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting
aside the merit list of the spot counselling of the candidates in B.
Tech. Mechanical Engineering with specialization in Auto
Branch; and
b). Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the
respondents to grant admission to the petitioner in B. Tech.
Mechanical Engineering with specialization in Auto Branch for
the academic commencing in the academic year 2020-2021 in
accordance with law; and
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:GARIMA MADAN
Signing Date:10.02.2022
17:31:24
c) Any other or further order, direction or reliefs as this Hon'ble
Court may deem just fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the present case may also be passed in favor of
the Petitioner."
2. Delhi Technological University (DTU), Indira Gandhi Delhi
Technical University of Women (IGDTUW), Indraprastha Institute of
Information Technology (IIITD), Delhi and Netaji Subhash University of
Technology (NSUT) participated in the Joint Admissions Counselling
(JAC) for admission to the undergraduate Engineering programmes offered
by the respondent institutes, conducted online with the support of the
National Informatics Centre (NIC). The admissions are done on the basis
of rank of students in the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) conducted by
the National Testing Agency (NTA).
3. The petitioner, a young boy, appeared in the JEE (Main) in April,
2020 for admission to Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering. The petitioner
obtained a rank of 36884 but was not able to secure admission in the initial
rounds of counselling. Upon the schedule for the spot round admission
process being announced for open counselling for the leftover seats for
some of the courses, the petitioner, on 04.12.2020 deposited the online spot
counselling fees of INR 10,000 at 6.58 pm from the petitioner's HDFC
bank account, through the payment gateway of the respondents, vide UPI
transaction No. 033918007807, which amount it is claimed was debited
from the petitioner's bank account on 04.12.2020 itself.
4. However, since the payment of the spot counselling fee of INR
10,000 by the petitioner was not reflected in the respondents' bank account,
before 11.59 pm on 04.12.2020, which was the cut-off for depositing the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:GARIMA MADAN
Signing Date:10.02.2022
17:31:24
said fee to participate in the spot counselling round, the petitioner was not
able to participate in the online spot round of counselling.
5. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner, through his father, sent emails
on 04.12.2020 and 09.12.2020 to the respondents complaining about the
petitioner's inability to access the online counselling portal of the
respondents, but received no response.
6. It is in these circumstances, that the petitioner approached this Court
by way of the present petition on 30.12.2020, which came to be listed
before this Court for the first time on 05.01.2021. Upon notice being
issued, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, wherein it has
been pointed that, since the entire process was online, the respondents
cannot be faulted for the petitioner's inability to join in the Spot round
counselling, as it is an admitted position that the amount was not credited
in the respondents' bank account before the cut-off.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was
desirous of taking admission in B.Tech (Mechanical Engineering with
specialisation in Auto), and a seat in the said course was available with the
respondent no.1/Delhi Technological University ('DTU') in the on-the-spot
counselling held on 04.12.2020. He contends that the last candidate who
was allotted a seat in the Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering, with
specialization in Auto, secured a rank of 36906, while the petitioner, who
was desirous of pursuing the said course, had obtained a rank of 36884,
and therefore, was deserved to be granted admission in the said course once
it was evident that the payment had been duly debited from his account. He
contends that the petitioner cannot be penalised for any lapse on the part of
the bank in crediting the payment in the respondents' bank account. He
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:GARIMA MADAN
Signing Date:10.02.2022
17:31:24
therefore prays that the respondents be directed to grant the petitioner
admission to the said course in this academic session.
8. On the other hand, Ms.Ahlawat, appearing for the respondents,
opposes the petition by contending that once the amount debited from the
petitioner's account was not reflected in the respondents' bank account, the
system could not permit him to participate in the online spot counselling,
which concluded at 11:59 p.m. on 04.12.2020. She submits that the
procedure is fully automated with no manual intervention from the
respondents, and the 3298 students who had successfully paid the spot
counselling round participation fee online, were permitted to participate in
the counselling. In the present case, once the amount was not credited to
the respondents' bank account, the respondent no.1 University was
justified in not permitting the petitioner to participate in the spot
counselling.
9. He further submits that after this round of counselling, a special spot
counselling was conducted on 26.12.2020, after it was found that seats
were still available for a number of courses, but the petitioner did not
participate in the same, clearly showing that he was not interested in
seeking admission. She submits that this is also evident from the fact that,
instead of approaching the Court promptly, preferred the writ petition
almost after one month, by which time all the seats were almost filled. She
therefore, prays that the writ petition be dismissed.
10. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
parties, I am of the view that even though, the petitioner may be justified in
urging that the requisite amount of INR 10,000/- having been debited from
his account before the deadline of 11.59 pm on 04.12.2020, he deserved to
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:GARIMA MADAN
Signing Date:10.02.2022
17:31:24
be permitted to be participate in the counselling. However, the fact remains
that on account of a technical issue for which the petitioner cannot be
faulted, the amount was not credited to the respondents' bank account
before the prescribed cut-off. It is also an admitted position that the
petitioner also did not participate in the next special spot counselling held
on 26.12.2020, wherein he could have obtained admission, if he so desired,
as seats were still available in a number of other courses. The petitioner has
not given any explanation as to why he has approached this Court after the
entire admission process was over, including the special spot counselling
held on 26.12.2020 and therefore, even though the petitioner may not truly
be at fault, regrettably no relief can be granted to him at this belated stage,
when admission process not only in the said academic session of 2020-21
but even in the next academic session stands completed. This Court,
therefore, has no other option but to reject the petitioner's claim.
11. The writ petition, along with pending applications, is accordingly
dismissed.
(REKHA PALLI)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 9, 2022
sr
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:GARIMA MADAN
Signing Date:10.02.2022
17:31:24
