Rajasthan High Court
Dr. Sapna Yadav D/O Chandra Kumar ... vs Union Of India on 27 April, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4424/2022
Dr. Sapna Yadav D/o Chandra Kumar Yadav, W/o Satyadev
Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Amarsar, Tehsil Buhana,
District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Under Secretary,
Government Of India, Ministry Of Ayush, Ayush Bhawan,
Gpo Complete, Ina, New Delhi.
2. Chairman, Ayush Admissions Central Counseling
Committee (Aaccc) Cum Director, All India Institute Of
Ayurveda (Aiia), Mathura Road, Gautam Puri, Sarita Vihar,
New Delhi, Pin 110076.
3. Principal, University College Of Ayurveda, Dr. Sarvepalli
Radhakrishn Rajasthan Ayurveda University, Naugar
Road, Jodhpur (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Yadav
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sharma
Ms. Neha Amola
Mr. Yuvraj Samant
Mr. Prafull Khandal
Mr. S.R.K. Vidyarth, Director,
Ministry of Ayush, Chairman/AACCC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
27/04/2022
In pursuance of direction of this Court dated 26.04.2022, Mr.
Rajendra Prasad Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents
No.1 & 2 submitted that the seat in Panchkarma Programme
(OBC-NCL) in the University College of Ayurveda, Dr. Sarvapalli
Radhakrishnan University Ayurveda was not only reflected in the
earlier round of counseling but, came to be allotted to the
different candidates. The seat came to be reflected in the stray
(2 of 6) [CW-4424/2022]
round of counseling as on none of the previous three occasions,
the allotted candidates joined the seat.
Although, the matter comes up on an application No.1/2022
filed by the petitioner but, on the joint request of the learned
counsels for the respective parties, the writ petition was heard on
its merit at this stage.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, a
successful candidate in All India Ayush Postgraduate Test-2021
(AIAPGT) who secured 814 All India Rank and 336 All India Rank
under OBC (NCL) Female Category, for quashing and setting aside
the condition No.2 in the notice dated 10.03.2022 issued by the
respondent No.2 with a direction to the respondents to permit her
to participate in the final stray vacancy round of All India Ayush
Central Counseling Committee (AACCC)-PG Counseling and allot
available seat of Panchkarma Programme under OBC category at
University College of Ayurveda, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan,
Rajasthan Ayurvedra University as per her merit.
The facts in brief are that the respondent no.2 issued a
notice dated 27.02.2022 for AACCC-PG Counseling providing
therein that if a candidate has been allotted a seat in third/mop up
round, he/she must join the allotted seat failing which he or she
will not be eligible for further counseling. The petitioner
participated in the third/mop up round wherein she was allotted a
seat in `Rasa Shashtra Evam Bhaishajya Kalpana' in Madan Mohan
Malviya Government Ayurveda College where she has joined.
Thereafter, the respondent issued a notice dated 10.03.2022 for
final stray vacancy round of AACCC-PG Counseling-2021 wherein,
condition no.2 provides that the candidates who have already
joined the allotted seat in the round-1/round-2/round-3/mop up
(3 of 6) [CW-4424/2022]
round of the AACCC-PG Counseling are rendered ineligible for
participation.
Assailing this condition, learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that notice dated 27.02.2022 provides that if a
candidate does not join the allotted seat in third/mop up round, it
would entail not only forfeiture of security money but, also
ineligibility for further counseling. Drawing attention of this Court
towards the notice dated 10.03.2022 issued for final stray vacancy
round, he submitted that it provides that a candidate who has
already joined the allotted seat in any of the earlier round, shall
be ineligible for participation. He submitted that once it was
compulsory for her to have joined the seat allotted in pursuance of
third/mop up round, she could not have been held ineligible for
participation in the final stray vacancy round. Learned counsel
submitted that in view of the note appended to professional
ayurveda/siddha/unani/homeopathy counseling seats in stray
round 2021, a candidate already allotted a seat is still entitled for
allotment of seat under the stray round. Learned counsel
submitted that counseling scheme and frequently asked question
for admission in Ayush Postgraduate Process (MD/MS)-2021
issued by the respondent No.2 provides that there will be no fresh
registration for candidates in the final stray vacancy round
meaning thereby a candidate who has already registered himself
for allotment of seat in any of the earlier round, is ineligible for
participation in the final stray vacancy round which is an arbitrary
condition inasmuch as it may result into allotment of seat to a
candidate less meritorious than the candidates already registered
and allotted seat in any of the earlier rounds. He submitted that
this is evident from the fact that a candidate less meritorious than
(4 of 6) [CW-4424/2022]
her has been allotted a seat of panchkarma programme in OBC
category at University College of Ayurveda, Dr. Sarvapalli
Radhakrishnan University Ayurveda. He, therefore, prayed that the
writ petition be allowed and the respondents may be directed to
allot her the seat for panchkarma programme in OBC category at
University College of Ayurveda, Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan
University Ayurveda.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2
submitted that as per the counseling scheme, a candidate who has
been allotted a seat in any of the earlier three rounds of
counseling, is ineligible for participation in the final stray round of
counseling. He submitted that it is so because of a salutary object
behind it. Learned counsel submitted that if a seat remains vacant
after completion of third/mop up round of counseling, the same
can be made available for allotment in the final stray round and if
any seat remains vacant after the stray round, which is the last
leg of counseling, the seat would remain unallotted. He submitted
that in these circumstances, it has been provided that the stray
round shall be the last round of counseling and no candidate, who
has already joined in pursuance of allotment of a seat in the
earlier round of counseling, shall be eligible and entitled for
allotment of the seat in the stray round. He submitted that the
petitioner has already been allotted a seat in the third/mop up
round of counseling and hence, in view of the counseling policy,
she is not entitled for any relief. With regard to note appended to
the provisional stray round, learned counsel submitted that it is a
general note appended to each and every counseling round and no
candidate is permitted to change the category or quota in the
stray round. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner
(5 of 6) [CW-4424/2022]
participated in the selection process with full knowledge of the
counseling scheme and hence, it is not permissible for her to
assail the same after getting allotment of a seat in the third/mop
up round. He, in support of his submission, relied upon an Apex
Court judgment in case of Manish Kumar Shahi Vs. State of Bihar
& Ors.; (2010) 12 SCC 576. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of
the writ petition.
Heard. Considered.
The counseling scheme unequivocally provides that any
candidate, who has been allotted a seat in any of the three rounds
of counseling, shall be ineligible for participation in the stray round
of counseling, i.e., the last leg of counseling. This Court finds force
in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents that
this scheme was carved out with a salutary object inasmuch as if a
candidate already allotted a seat in earlier round of litigation is
permitted to participate in the final stray round, the seat occupied
by him/her shall fall vacant which cannot be included in the final
stray round and would remain unfilled causing national loss. If
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted, it
would entail endless process of counselling which cannot be
permitted as there has to be an end to each and every process. It
is not a case where the petitioner has not been put to any hostile
discrimination. In these circumstances, the petitioner is not
entitled to allotment of a seat in the final stray round.
The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that the writ
petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed accordingly.
(6 of 6) [CW-4424/2022]
The pending application stands disposed of accordingly.
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
PRAGATI/S-157
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
