# Krishna Kumar Gupta v. A.D.J., Allahabad and others

- **Citation:** (2005) 1 ILRA 167
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2004-09-29
- **Case number:** C. M. Application No. 161701 of 2004
- **Bench:** Arun Tandon
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/krishna-kumar-gupta-v-a-d-j-allahabad-and-others-40343
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Constitution
of
India-Art.
226Educational
matter-Grant
of
interim
relief-Petitioner appeared in entrance
examination for admission to MBBS
Course various Medicale Colleges in U.P.-
Petitioner a female belonging to OBC
category-Notice published by Director
General, Medical Education and Training
mentioned
15.7.2004
as
date
for
registration and councilling of female
candidates
from
rank
1
to
550-
Petitioner's
rank
232-Therefore,
respondents
were
not
justified
in
refusing admission to petitioner on
ground that she had not appeared for
registration and councilling on dates
from 10 to 14 July, 2004-direction issued
to grant admission to in MBBS course, if
any female candidate lower in rank to
petitioner has been admitted to MBBS
course.

Held: Para 13

In view of the peculiar facts and
circumstances as noticed hereinabove it
is provided that the respondents shall
grant admission to the petitioner in
MBBS course if any female candidate
lower in rank to the petitioner has been
admitted
to
the
said
course,
by
tomorrow i.e. 30th September, 2004.
The right of the petitioner to get
admission in MBBS course shall not be
permitted
to
be
defeated
by
the
respondents on the plea that it is not
possible to grant admission to her by
tomorrow.

## Text

http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1All] Krishna Kumar Gupta V. A.D.J., Allahabad and others
167
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 29.09.2004

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE ARUN TANDON, J.

C. M. Application No. 161701 of 2004
In re:
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 36849 of 2004

Km. Kavita Yadav

...Petitioner
Versus
Director General, Medical Education and
Training, U.P. and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Rakesh Kumar

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Mahendra Pratap
S.C.

Constitution
of
India-Art.
226Educational
matter-Grant
of
interim
relief-Petitioner appeared in entrance
examination for admission to MBBS
Course various Medicale Colleges in U.P.-
Petitioner a female belonging to OBC
category-Notice published by Director
General, Medical Education and Training
mentioned
15.7.2004
as
date
for
registration and councilling of female
candidates
from
rank
1
to
550-
Petitioner's
rank
232-Therefore,
respondents
were
not
justified
in
refusing admission to petitioner on
ground that she had not appeared for
registration and councilling on dates
from 10 to 14 July, 2004-direction issued
to grant admission to in MBBS course, if
any female candidate lower in rank to
petitioner has been admitted to MBBS
course.

Held: Para 13

In view of the peculiar facts and
circumstances as noticed hereinabove it
is provided that the respondents shall
grant admission to the petitioner in
MBBS course if any female candidate
lower in rank to the petitioner has been
admitted
to
the
said
course,
by
tomorrow i.e. 30th September, 2004.
The right of the petitioner to get
admission in MBBS course shall not be
permitted
to
be
defeated
by
the
respondents on the plea that it is not
possible to grant admission to her by
tomorrow.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.)

1. On 14.09.2004 this Court granted
time upto 23.09.2004 to the counsel
appearing for respondents 1 and 2 to file
counter affidavit / seek instructions. On
23.09.2004
again
the
matter
was
adjourned to 28.09.2004. On 28.09.2004
the matter was directed to be taken up
today.

2. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar on
behalf of the petitioner and Sri Mahendra
Pratap on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.
No counter affidavit has been filed on
behalf of respondents 1 and 2. However,
Sri
Mahendra
Pratap
has
received
instructions and on the basis of the
instructions so received he has made his
submissions for justifying the action of
the respondents.

3. This Court is aware that in normal
circumstances no interim orders granting
provisional admission are to be passed in
view of the law laid down by the High
Court as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. However, the Court cannot loose
sight of the fact that in the facts of the
present case if interim orders are not
passed the present writ petition is liable to
be rendered infructuous, inasmuch as
under the guidelines issued by the
Medical Council of India following the
directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2005
168
admission
to
MBBS
Course
must
necessarily come to an end by tomorrow
i.e.30th September, 2004, meaning thereby
that if no orders are passed in favour of
the petitioner and even if she ultimately
succeeds in the petition, she would not be
able
to
get
admission.

In
such
circumstances this Court is proceeding to
consider the application for interim relief
(C. M. Application No. 161701 of 2004)
for granting provisional admission to the
petitioner.

4. It is not in dispute between the
parties that the petitioner has appeared in
the entrance examination conducted by
Chaudhary Charan Singh University for
admission to MBBS course in various
medical colleges in the State of Uttar
Pradesh. It is also not in dispute that the
petitioner is a female and belongs to
Other Backward Category (for short
OBC). According to the merit which was
prepared in pursuance of the aforesaid
entrance examination the petitioner has
secured the following rank:--

1. Over all rank (general)
= 808
2. Rank in OBC category
= 338
3. Rank in Female category = 232

5. According to the notice published
by
the
Director
General,
Medical
Education and Training, U.P., Lucknow
dated 08.07.2004 the candidates who have
secured various ranks in pursuance of the
aforesaid entrance examination were
invited for registration and councilling. It
would be worthwhile to refer to the notice
so published by the Director General
Medical Education and Training, U.P.
Lucknow the relevant portion whereof is
as follows:-

Iakthdj.k
frfFk
'kqYd
:0200@
dkmfUlfyax
frfFk
,ao le;
Js.kh@
mi Js.kh
 jSad
1.
10.07.2004
11.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls

vukjf{kr
 vksoj
vky jSad
 1
ls
200
rd
 201 ls
400 rd
2.
11.07.2004
12.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls

vukjf{kr
vksoj vky
jSad
 401 ls
650 rd
 651 ls
1000 rd
3.
12.07.2004
13.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls

vukjf{kr
vksoj vky
jSad
1001 ls
1250 rd
1251 ls
1500 rd
4.
13.07.2004
14.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls
02
vU;
fiNMk oxZ
Js.kh jSad
1ls 350
rd
351
ls
700 rd
5.
14.07.2004
15.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls
02
vU;
fiNMk oxZ
04vuqlwfpr
tutkfr
03vuqlwfpr
tkfr
Js.kh jSad
 701 ls
1000
rd
Jas.kh@jSad
lHkh vgZ
vuqlwfpr
tkfr jSad
1ls
450 rd

6.
15.07.2004
16.07.2004
10.30 cts ls
1.30 cts ls
03
vuqlwfpr
tkfr
lHkh Jsf.k;ksa
dh
miJsf.k;ksa ds
vgZ vH;FkhZ
({kSfrt
vkj{k.k)
05 LorUrzrk
laxzke
lsukuh
V0tk0jSad
 451
ls
1000
rd
miJs.kh
jSad
1ls
100 rd
miJs.kh
jSad
1ls
100 rd
miJs.kh
jSad
1ls
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1All] Km. Kavita Yadav V. Director General, Medical Eductaion & Training and others
169
06;q)
esa
'kghn@
viax
ds vkfJr
07 fodykax
08efgyk
150 rd
lHkh Js.kh
dh
lfEefyr
efgyk jSad
1ls 550
rd

6. From the aforesaid notice it is
apparently clear that the rank achieved by
the petitioner in the aforesaid entrance
examination finds mention against the
dates mentioned in the first column of the
notice i.e. dates 10.07.2004, 11.07.2004
and 12.07.2004 in view of her over all
rank, against item no. 4 and 5 i.e.
13.07.2004 and 14.07.2004 on the basis of
the rank achieved by the petitioner as
OBC candidate and lastly against item
no.6, bearing date 15.07.2004 i.e. '08
Mahila' having regard to the rank secured
as female candidate. In pursuance of the
aforesaid notice the petitioner admittedly
appeared for councilling at RALC,
Daliganj, Lucknow on 15.07.2004. The
petitioner has been refused admission by
the respondents on the ground that she
was required to get herself registered for
councilling on 11th, 12th and 13th July,
2004 having regard to her over all rank
and in any case on 14th July, 2004 having
regard to the rank achieved by her in OBC
category.

7. On behalf of the petitioner it is
contended that the stand taken by the
respondents
is
totally
misconceived
inasmuch as the petitioner falls within the
category of female candidates in which
she has secured the best rank. According
to the petitioner she was advised to appear
for registration and councilling on 15th
July, 2004 which was the date specifically
mentioned in respect of female category
of candidates from rank 1 to 550.

8. Counsel for the respondents,
however,
contended
that
since
the
petitioner
had
not
appeared
for
registration and councilling between 10th
to 14th July, 2004 she has lost her right to
be
considered
for
registration
and
councilling on 15th July, 2004. The
counsel for the respondents has placed
reliance on note no. 3 of the said notice
which says that on being allotment of the
seats of respective categories councilling
for the seats of that category shall be
closed.

9. The Court is of the opinion that
the
petitioner
had
the
option
for
registration and councilling in pursuance
of the notice published by the Director
General, Medical Education and Training
referred to above, on 15th July, 2004,
having regard to the best rank which the
petitioner
has
achieved
as
female
candidate. It cannot be said that she
committed any irregularity or any default
on the basis whereof the respondents
could have refused admission to the
petitioner.

10. From the notice which has been
published
by
the
Director
General
Medical Education and Training it is clear
that no where it has been provided that
female category candidates having regard
to their rank in other categories must
report for registration and councilling
which was to take place between 10th to
14th July, 2004, and that if such female
candidates do not report for registration
and councilling on the basis of over all
rank/OBC rank, they shall not be entitled
for admission on the basis of registration
and councilling for female candidates
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2005
170
fixed for 15th July, 2004. In the opinion
of the Court the notice published by the
Director General Medical Education and
Training does not in any way intimate that
the candidates shall loose their right to be
considered as a female candidate on 15th
July, 2004 if they do not appear for
registration and councilling on the earlier
dates mentioned in the notice.

11.

The
notice
specifically
mentioned 15th July, 2004 as the date for
registration and councilling of female
candidates from rank 1 to 550. Therefore,
a clear assurance was held out by the
Director General of Medical Education
and Training that the registration and
councilling
of
female
category
of
candidates would be held on 15th July,
2004 only. Therefore, the respondents
were not justified in refusing admission to
the petitioner on the ground that she had
not
appeared
for
registration
and
councilling on the dates from 10th to 14th
July, 2004.

12. The note 3 relied by the
respondents more or less supports the case
of the petitioner inasmuch as the seats of
female category could not have exhausted
prior to 15th July, 2004. It was also
legally not permissible to close the
registration and councilling of female
candidates prior to 15th July, 2004 in view
of the notice issued by the Director
General Medical Education and Training
dated 8th July, 2004 by which all the
female
candidates were invited
for
registration and councilling on 15th July,
2004.

13. In view of the peculiar facts and
circumstances as noticed hereinabove it is
provided that the respondents shall grant
admission to the petitioner in MBBS
course if any female candidate lower in
rank to the petitioner has been admitted to
the said course, by tomorrow i.e. 30th
September, 2004. The right of the
petitioner to get admission in MBBS
course shall not be permitted to be
defeated by the respondents on the plea
that it is not possible to grant admission to
her by tomorrow.

14. Sri Mahendra Pratap, counsel for
the respondents, prays for and is granted
10 days' time to file counter affidavit. List
on 8th October, 2004.

15. A copy of this order be supplied
by the office to Sri Mahendra Pratap
Advocate, counsel for the respondents,
today, to enable him to communicate the
said order to the authority concerned.

16. A copy of this order be also
supplied to be counsel for the petitioner
today on payment of necessary charges.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 1.9.2004

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE R.B. MISRA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34908 of 2001

Anil Kumar Prajapati

...Petitioner
Versus
Additional Managing Director, UPSRTC,
Lucknow and others
...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Dr. R.G. Padia
Sri Prakash Padia
Sri S.P. Pandey

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Avanish Misra
Sri Samir Sharma